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: 20
68
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by onequestion
So who cares?

No seriously though, if we are not spiritual entities, then why do most of us discuss and think spiritually?

How is it that i can use some form of a drug and the entire world around me changes, yet this is considered not real?

Have you contemplated what this means to your experience of reality and how so it can be changed?
edit on 15-5-2011 by onequestion because: (no reason given)


It's the chemical effect of the drugs on your brain. To those not effected by the drugs, noting has changed, they are soley viewed by you.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Slipdoggety
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.


Hey, didn't say it was fact...just found it as a interesting thread considering the speculative statement made


Heaven could be a giant twinkie



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:35 AM
link   
If he is correct then it really doesn't matter.
If we are truly dead, when we die,
we won't know the difference will we?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Steven Hawking is sick man.Having this kind of physical disability surely affects the thought process.I have had this discussion with numerous academics and Steven hawking is no more privy to ultimate reality than you or I. He says face facts based on as yet 'undiscovered evidence' .

He has his own burdens to bear to be sure ,but his observations have no more validity than mine which tells me that the totally and nature of existence is vaster than he claims I base that on, previously discovered evidence



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrphenFire
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.


He didn't provide a source and assuming his numbers are correct???... I don't think so.

Also, it may be that those that experience poverty are more likely to believe in God. Economic factor is still the main causal factor.

Your absurd nonsense is like: I'm a millionaire atheist and now that I have found GOD I am going out to rob someone because I know that will make him happy. You fail.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

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"
Well, if he genuinely thinks something(which he does), and accepts that as his truth(which he does), then he believes in it. It's the very definition of "believe".

I don't feel like getting into semantics with you. If you read my post, it's not hard to see what my point was. It doesn't matter if he said the word "believe" or not, he's a non-believer in the afterlife.
edit on 16-5-2011 by TravisT because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Have compassion on the guy he is strapped to a chair, of course there is no heaven for him.
If he could naturally increase the level of '___' in his brain, he will see different things.
Maybe then he would come up with the theory of everything, then he will be in heaven.
edit on 16-5-2011 by tungus because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by gemineye
reply to post by spacedonk
 


I don't even know what I believe in as far as heaven goes, but...

How the hell does Stephen Hawking know whether heaven exists or not? Last I checked, he hasn't died. How'd he find out?

He may be a smart guy, but when it comes to knowing whether heaven exists or not, he doesn't know any more than the rest of us.
edit on 5/16/2011 by gemineye because: (no reason given)


Stephen Hawking is just pontificating.
He is also probably bitter about being disabled.
Heaven is real.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   
Hawking cannot prove that there is no heaven, but he seems comfortable enough making dogmatic statements as such.

You have to wonder if this "thinker" and "scientist" approaches science the same way at times that he approaches religion. I am not a physicist or a mathmetician and could not even begin to converse with him about his feild of study, but I have to wonder if there are moments when his beleifs about a theory he is working on become the driving cause that he then marshals theoretical proofs behind in support of whatever he is saying.

In my book, I could take him more seriously if he took an agnostic position rather than flat out denial.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by spacedonk

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


www.guardian.co.uk

A belief that heaven or an afterlife awaits us is a "fairy story" for people afraid of death, Stephen Hawking has said.

In a dismissal that underlines his firm rejection of religious comforts, Britain's most eminent scientist said there was nothing beyond the moment when the brain flickers for the final time.

Hawking, who was diagnosed with motor neurone disease at the age of 21, shares his thoughts on death, human purpose and our chance existence in an exclusive interview with the Guardian today.

The incurable illness was expected to kill Hawking within a few years of its symptoms
(visit the link for the full news article)



He is a scientist. I'll take his thoughts on physics and other sciences with reverence but he is no more qualified to speak about spirituality than anybody off the street. It makes me sad when people of science says with absolute confidence that there is no spiritual aspect to the world. Saying that without proof is totally unscientific.

In the interview, he sounded more like a bitter old man than a distinguished scientist.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
I wonder why this is such big news? Stephen cannot prove it. Its just his opinion. I think that we have lost touch with our spiritual side of life and it seems TPTB want us to be mindless dumb downed humans that only care about material things. I was watching some interesting videos of Graham Hancock giving a lesson on lost civilizations and the lost history of the earth. It was mind opening for sure. To me Stephen Hawking is a fool for saying this. To make it such big news over the internet has to make you wonder what is the agenda? There is lost knowledge that we do not know about concerning the history of this planet. I think there is a afterlife of some kind. This is just my opinion but if you do the research and study the history of this earth you will find some amazing things concerning the spiritual side of life.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

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.



What the article said was:

In the talk, he will argue that tiny quantum fluctuations in the very early universe became the seeds from which galaxies, stars, and ultimately human life emerged. "Science predicts that many different kinds of universe will be spontaneously created out of nothing. It is a matter of chance which we are in," he said.


Are you an atheist?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tephra
If religion is going to persist, I think they're going to need to have a revolution, a new era bible. Just like how the bible plagiarized and revamped all the old fairytales from religions past. This new fairy tale will have to modernize it.

We know what lies beyond the sky now, the sky always being the symbol of heaven, despite how infantile that seems to us now.

It's just sad really, so many people have been duped to believing water vapor floating in the sky is some type of alternate world.


It makes me laugh when people say religions before the bible. The oldest texts or scribes ever found were biblical so where is your evidence that the bible or Torah were copied?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT
Well, if he genuinely thinks something(which he does), and excepts that as his truth(which he does), then he believes in it. It's the very definition of "believe".

I don't feel like getting into semantics with you. If you read my post, it's not hard to see what my point was. It doesn't matter if he said the word "believe" or not, he's a non-believer in the afterlife.


Well, the overall message is fine
but the issue here -is- semantics. if he used the term "believe", then this thread wouldn't exist...it would simply be a quick blurb that would be overlooked.

Sematics is the issue here, not the intent of the message.
edit on 16-5-2011 by SaturnFX because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


Define spiritual, please.
Someone for the love of god
explain what you are trying say when you use these words.

edit on 16-5-2011 by LikeDuhObviously because: oh ffs that guy is still here. lol in before # goes full retard again ...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by lifeoflyman
I def don't follow religion but I def believe and feel there is more to this thing we call life after we die. I think thats the problem religion and science to be separate and they will never get the whole picture unless they work together.
Something in what you say makes sense to me.

I think it's a mixture. Some life dies forever. Some life has an after-life. Some life is ruled by a god with an iron fist. There is no universal god. This universe is a combination of both views.
edit on 16-5-2011 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


God can be many things. I try not to understand God for I know I cannot.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Id have to disagree with him.. Maybe there isn't a "heaven" so to speak. But an afterlife? There are thousands upon thousands of people who "see" this afterlife when they die but come back. Even kids as young as 5 have described in perfect detail to other adults accounts of what they also saw. Let alone every civilization from the past, who possessed real knowledge far beyond what we know about. I am thinking Mr. Steve is just loosing it or something. But he is entitled to his opinion, which is all it is. The evidence we do have, although I guess mostly circumstantial, far outweighs his opinion, in my opinion.


Deebo
edit on 16-5-2011 by Deebo because: fix



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT

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?



Your enlightenment brings instant inspiration
.
I can now understand what makes someone a terrorist, murderer, John Doe or savior. Because he/she lives up to his/her potential.

Yeah right, Stephen Hawking should thank God for not making him a full retard.


 
edit on 5/16/2011 by wisdomnotemotion because:  



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by subby

What the article said was:

In the talk, he will argue that tiny quantum fluctuations in the very early universe became the seeds from which galaxies, stars, and ultimately human life emerged. "Science predicts that many different kinds of universe will be spontaneously created out of nothing. It is a matter of chance which we are in," he said.


Are you an atheist?


A nice elegant hypothesis.
Of course, my issue is the whole "spontaneously created out of nothing"

Energy cannot be created, nor destroyed, only transferred (and made into energy drinks). The theory itself stands on shaky grounds and is in danger of violating some pretty basic laws of thermodynamics.

Yes, I am an atheist.




top topics



 
68
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join