It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Stephen Hawking: 'There is no heaven; it's a fairy story'

page: 19
68
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT
Can you show me scientific proof of a soul?


I don't know if this qualifies as "scientific" proof of a soul, but it does raise questions.


From Wikipedia: In 1907, MacDougall weighed six patients while they were in the process of dying from tuberculosis in an old age home. It was relatively easy to determine when death was only a few hours away, and at this point the entire bed was placed on an industrial sized scale which was apparently sensitive to the gram. He took his results (a varying amount of perceived mass loss in most of the six cases) to support his hypothesis that the soul had mass, and when the soul departed the body, so did this mass. The determination of the soul weighing 21 grams was based on the average loss of mass in the six patients. Experiments on mice and other animals took place. Most notably the weighing upon death of sheep seemed to create mass for a few minutes which later disappeared. The hypothesis was made that a soul portal formed upon death which then whisked the soul away.


Snopes: Doctor weighs patients at moment of death

Wiki article: Duncan MacDougall
edit on 16-5-2011 by Elbereth because: correct and add




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by ZforZionism
 


Your conclusions are inaccurate. He didn't provide a source, but assuming his numbers are correct, how can you say religion is a deterrent to crime when 99.75% of the prison population is theist, disproportional to the 8-16% of atheists in all of society? You fail.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Jamesprototype
 



I do not understand why the quoted statement would be the cause of loss of respect - care to explain?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Science is, to me, the gathering and collation of data for use in understanding and manipulation of the different aspects of our reality.
If it continues on it's present course, science will eventually catalogue and define the physical (or otherwise) laws governing just about everything...

In the beginnings of science, mind recognized it's ability to manipulate matter, and thereby control it's environment...
The most evident early patterns of this can be seen in things like “nests” or even simple tools such as a hard rock on which to crack a shell.

We have improved upon this concept with things like...shelter...food-production...math...and a myriad of other (controls/sciences/technologies) to the point that we can do things like fine tune our surrounding temperature with a gauge, bring water and food to our fingertips with little effort, transport ourselves at great speeds to distant places, just to name a few examples of how we use our intelligence and science to control and manipulate the things in our environment...

Yet there are many things that we cannot change ..."Yet".

Obviously the goal of science is to reach a level where we can control literally all aspects of our environment.

If we were to have an itemized list of some of those (as yet uncontrolled aspects of our lives) some of the things on it might be....aging...scarcity...free energy; just to name some of the biggies.
Also, it can be extrapolated that, on the list would be things like cosmic exploration and even time manipulation..

The last two are, IMO, the ultimate in science, but to say they are unattainable is to deny the already existing pattern/trend of the practice.
The implication is that these things will also, eventually be understood, and thereby manipulated/controlled.

Once immortality and time travel are both achieved,(and this may have already happened long ago...or yet to be?), then if there wasn’t already a God, there will be....

Think about it for a few minutes... If you lived forever, and had all the time in eternity to “do things, and could travel to any point in time...what would you spend your time doing?

Let’s say, you went back to the moment of the big bang to see who was there, and discovered that it was only “you” who were there?

Remember also, that, possibly, by this time, you would have already discovered just about every other aspect of science in reality...so...what’s left but the complexities that arise from the interactions between other minds, (offspring perhaps) in the material world...
And when I say, the material world, I don’t mean just the parts our eyes can see all the time,
I’m also talking about those things we see only some of the times,(the paranormal) and can never seem to prove...

I hope Mr. Hawkings has some sort of supernatural experience like I and many others have...
In the end, "seeing is beleiving" is the best convincer...


edit on 16-5-2011 by Khurzon because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-5-2011 by Khurzon because: accidently posted before I was finished...

edit on 16-5-2011 by Khurzon because: spelling



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
Secular countrys (those with around 80% atheist population) have very reduced crime rates.

Religion drives people mad...the data confirms this.

Not just that, secular countrys tend to have less STD's, less abortions, and a higher education and standard of living. Religion is the hobble that was put of civilization that has kept us in a fearing murderous ignorance.


Just skip over Soviet Russia and communist China in all of this, where murder was/is done on a massive scale by the state. They certainly were not theist, atheism was the law.
And the US today is hardly a Christian country now, it has been "liberated". A cross doesn't grace the white house lawn at Christmas. You can't so much as say Christian prayers at a school. Try making your point using a time when the US was mostly Christian.
Lumping all religions in together is also wrong here, obviously he was referring mainly to Christianity.
edit on 16-5-2011 by grizzle2 because: typo

edit on 16-5-2011 by grizzle2 because: additional info.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
He is right heaven doesn't exisit, but the good news is there is life after death. There is a higher power but we have no reference of it. Your body is nothing more then a vessel housing your spirit. There are other dimensions and realms all around you right now. You are currently connected to this physical realm via your spirit and emotion which is truly in a spiritual realm right now. Try some dmt and learn this for yourself. '___' is in every living organism including all animals, plants, and humans. This is not by accident. You have experienced many lives before this one... Check the video and book out below:

www.youtube.com... '___' VID
www.amazon.com... The most interesting book you will ever read...

Our top physicist are aware of the fact other realms exist...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Stephen Hawking is as entitled to have his opinion on spirituality and life after death as is anyone else.

And at the moment, he is as qualified - and no MORE qualified - as any other living person is to comment on what happens to humans after we die. He doesn't know. Nobody alive does.

Being an astrophysicist and a scientific wizard does not provide him any more insight into what happens after mortal death than the insight a street-sweeper might have.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Elbereth

Originally posted by TravisT
Can you show me scientific proof of a soul?


I don't know if this qualifies as "scientific" proof of a soul, but it does raise questions.


From Wikipedia: In 1907, MacDougall weighed six patients while they were in the process of dying from tuberculosis in an old age home. It was relatively easy to determine when death was only a few hours away, and at this point the entire bed was placed on an industrial sized scale which was apparently sensitive to the gram. He took his results (a varying amount of perceived mass loss in most of the six cases) to support his hypothesis that the soul had mass, and when the soul departed the body, so did this mass. The determination of the soul weighing 21 grams was based on the average loss of mass in the six patients. Experiments on mice and other animals took place. Most notably the weighing upon death of sheep seemed to create mass for a few minutes which later disappeared. The hypothesis was made that a soul portal formed upon death which then whisked the soul away.


Doctor weighs patients at moment of death

Duncan MacDougall/Wiki article
edit on 16-5-2011 by Elbereth because: BB code
If you're interested in that, I would suggest reading a book called Spook by Mary Roach. It's basically about scientific studies into the soul, and yes, measuring the body was one of them, but isn't substantial evidence, as there are things that can skew this, like something as simple as all of your oxygen leaving the lungs after you die, gases in your body leaving, etc.

It's an interesting read.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio
the physiological section of the brain called 'the God part of the brain' actually exists


That some scientist attached that label doesn't mean a thing.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Elbereth

Originally posted by TravisT
Can you show me scientific proof of a soul?


I don't know if this qualifies as "scientific" proof of a soul, but it does raise questions.


From Wikipedia: In 1907, MacDougall weighed six patients while they were in the process of dying from tuberculosis in an old age home. It was relatively easy to determine when death was only a few hours away, and at this point the entire bed was placed on an industrial sized scale which was apparently sensitive to the gram. He took his results (a varying amount of perceived mass loss in most of the six cases) to support his hypothesis that the soul had mass, and when the soul departed the body, so did this mass. The determination of the soul weighing 21 grams was based on the average loss of mass in the six patients. Experiments on mice and other animals took place. Most notably the weighing upon death of sheep seemed to create mass for a few minutes which later disappeared. The hypothesis was made that a soul portal formed upon death which then whisked the soul away.


Snopes: Doctor weighs patients at moment of death

Wiki article: Duncan MacDougall
edit on 16-5-2011 by Elbereth because: correct and add


I read some stuff about this a while ago, wasn't it determined it was most likely/as likely to be the weight differential between lungs full of air and empty lungs after death?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:21 AM
link   
I've found that some very intelligent people who possess very analytical minds also tend to be the least open-minded. How can he say that when science itself continues to lead us down the path toward bigger questions? What I mean is that every scientific discovery leads to more questions than it satisfies. The more we learn, the less we know.


edit on 16-5-2011 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by subby
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I hate to state the obvious here, but the burden of proof rests with those claiming something does exist.


The burden of proof rests with those claiming something, period.

He -claims- there is no afterlife...he made the claim
Any atheist worth his salt knows better than to say that.
since he stated the claim, he must provide the evidence...thats how it works.

I do not believe in a god. there is no evidence to suggest that. that is not a claim, that is a starting point.

There is no god, I know because my brain is magical and I have proof of no deitys..that is a claim and essencially what he said


Impressive word twisting logical fallacy skills, but not good enough.
What he is essentially stating is that he does not believe there is a heaven or God because there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. Which is what you've just pointed out to be logically correct.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Great. Another Darwinist voicing out loud.

I guess all Darwinist and Evolutionist can run around naked and do whatever they like day and night. Because there's no such thing as good and evil anymore.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by grizzle2
Just skip over Soviet Russia and communist China in all of this, where murder was/is done on a massive scale by the state. They certainly were not theist, atheism was the law.

Although I wasn't talking about those, you make a good point
Absolute power corrupts...go figure.
What your stating is that people in power are jacktards. I agree...but that has little to do with atheism, that has more to do with communist and totalitarian socialism.



And the US today is hardly a Christian country now, it has been "liberated". A cross doesn't grace the white house lawn at Christmas. You can't so much as say Christian prayers at a school. Try making your point using a time when the US was mostly Christian.

Shall we go with the civil war era? the revolution? world war 1? 2? the droves of native americans slaughtered? which time was the hayday of christianity so we can examine the statistics?

America is not a christian nation, it is however a religious nation...the sweeping massive majority have some form of religion...that makes it a theistic culture...
Mississippi and Lousiana have the highest christian population, and coincidently the highest crime rate/prison population.
Go figure.


Lumping all religions in together is also wrong here, obviously he was referring mainly to Christianity.
edit on 16-5-2011 by grizzle2 because: typo

edit on 16-5-2011 by grizzle2 because: additional info.


How is that obvious? You think christianity is the only religion with a god, heaven, and afterlife?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


The thread you mentioned is a highly speculative thread, and its source is a study bible, that is dubious. Its hardly proof that heaven could be a planet, just someones weird perception. None of the verses i looked up matched what he was saying they did.

Stephen hawkings can say what he wants, he knows only fools believe him. What has he ever done that is that special? I hear he is smart, but if he is so smart, how come he hasn't found a cure for his disease? Oh! thats right he doesn't really know everything. He works in Quantum Mechanics, we don't even know if he knows anything at all yet. Most of his stuff is theoretical.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
I'm sure Stephen Hawking considers consciousness to be an emergent phenomen, arising from the complex interactions in the human body, primarily the brain.

Presumably he considers the interactions necessary for consciousness to be definable in a logical system, either they occur or they do not.

If so, he would now conclude that consciousness is bound to logical occurrences and not any particular physical occurrences.

If physical occurrences stops, there are other to take their place. For the logical system causing the emergence of consciousness, it is only a matter of definition, what physical occurrences it should adhere to.

So, stating that consciousness must end when some particular physical occurrences stops, is wrong, if you believe in reasoning that is.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by wisdomnotemotion
Great. Another Darwinist voicing out loud.

I guess all Darwinist and Evolutionist can run around naked and do whatever they like day and night. Because there's no such thing as good and evil anymore.
And again, you never read the link. Hawkins says he doesn't believe in an afterlife, therefore, he says we should live up to our potential, and try to help out and advance society while we're here on earth. It was an uplifting message from a non-believer.

Did some of you not even read it?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by subby

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by subby
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I hate to state the obvious here, but the burden of proof rests with those claiming something does exist.


The burden of proof rests with those claiming something, period.

He -claims- there is no afterlife...he made the claim
Any atheist worth his salt knows better than to say that.
since he stated the claim, he must provide the evidence...thats how it works.

I do not believe in a god. there is no evidence to suggest that. that is not a claim, that is a starting point.

There is no god, I know because my brain is magical and I have proof of no deitys..that is a claim and essencially what he said


Impressive word twisting logical fallacy skills, but not good enough.
What he is essentially stating is that he does not believe there is a heaven or God because there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. Which is what you've just pointed out to be logically correct.


If he was stating his beliefs, thats fine...he can do that until the cows come home
but he never used the word believe...he stated it matter of factly.
You are the ones twisting his words, I am looking at them at face value...there is no twisting, nor logical fallacys from my viewpoint.

Stand back for a moment from religiously protecting his words simply because its him and view what he said...he made a catagorical statement of truth..as a scientist, if you make such a statement in the same way he made it, you must provide proof, preferrably peer reviewed for mass consumption.

As an atheist, it is important to patrol our own so they don't start spouting religious nonsense....knowledge is key here, and he is not providing knowledge, he is dressing his opinion based on his observations as fact..and that, is equal to some quack stating that the universe is a peanut.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT

Originally posted by wisdomnotemotion
Great. Another Darwinist voicing out loud.

I guess all Darwinist and Evolutionist can run around naked and do whatever they like day and night. Because there's no such thing as good and evil anymore.
And again, you never read the link. Hawkins says he doesn't believe in an afterlife, therefore, he says we should live up to our potential, and try to help out and advance society while we're here on earth. It was an uplifting message from a non-believer.

Did some of you not even read it?


Please quote the text where he uses the term "believe"



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Well thank God (:up
for Stephen Hawking clearing this one up, I was almost starting to believe.

I think someone just has a grudge.



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join