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: 22
68
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
If we get to have an after-life, then so do the rest of the lifeforms on our planet, including hte single celled organisms. Nothing should be left out. We don't know enough about life in this universe to only give ourselves this luxury. So the only fair compromise is to give every form of life the right to an afterlife. Anything else is simple selfish desire to single yourself out.




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Perfekt detail you say? What about those peolpe who died and DIDN'T remember whatever dream or experience they had? What about those people who experienced something that doesn't fit what you think it should be? Why cherry pick?


Well, there need only be a single white crow in existance for white crows to exist.

If only a single person has experienced an afterlife that could be proved (there hasn't yet, evidence, but no proof..but just saying)...if a single afterlife is proved, then afterlife = exists...

its unnecessary to have everyone experience an afterlife for it to be real...now, available for everyone is a different story...however, thats not the point here.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you use the 'equal symbol' to denote 'existential'??

I think you should leave the thinking to the big boys, cup cake.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT
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.


You mean like post-mortem flatulence? Duncan MacDougall's experiments probably are a little stinky as actual science, but I give him an "A" for effort and curiosity.

This is purely anecdotal, but when my grandmother died at home from cancer under hospice care some years ago, my mother, who was at her bedside, claimed at the moment of death a fuzzy, white "something" flew out of the top of my grandmother's head and out of the window.

Another anecdote for what it is worth: When my father unexpectedly passed, I heard him loudly call my name at what was later determined to be his time of death. He was over one-hundred miles away.

Many have had similar experiences from time immemorial. Are we all just cracked?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by space cadet
I would like to see proof that there is not a God or Creator.

I keep seeing the repsonse to those who say there is a heaven or God being 'prove it'.

Again I ask, prove that there is not. Or do you simply reside to thinking there is not because Mr Hawking said so?


I would like to see proof that there is no Father Christmas.

I ask for proof that there is not!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by antmax21

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by antmax21
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


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


Luke: 17:21
Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

You can understand yourself


So, is God petty? are you petty?


What does that bible quotation have to do with my understanding of what God does or wants? ......The kingdom is within all of us but I cannot say what God is or does. Once again, God can be many things, including petty. God can take all your possessions to test your beliefs. It is up to you to relinquish or keep your faith.


heh, test your beliefs.
Why would a deity need to do that anyhow? ok, we are drifting away from the topic, lets just say that a good tree will always produce good fruit and is incapable of producing corrupt fruit. likewise, a corrupt tree produces only corrupt fruit.
God made the tree of life, humanity...therefore we are, by his design, incapable of being corrupt in the image he created. To be otherwise = making his words untrue, and therefore fallable, and therefore not a deity at all if his works, or words, can be corrupted.

religion creates too many paradoxes.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Why is it that an atheistic scientist who states his belief on “god” the afterlife based on his profound knowledge and experience of the universe and quantum physics is perceived as unqualified? Yet if a secular scientist were to make the opposite claim based on the same observations this would be acceptable.

It seems to me that the problem here isn’t so much the message as it is the messenger. Hawkins statement is the result of his years of study and observations of both the known and theoretical universe in which he has found no reasonable proof for the existence of a “god” or the afterlife. On the contrary, a Vatican scientist who’s been exposed to the same study and observation would only be left to conclude that no reasonable proof can be found to show that god does not exist.

I find it interesting that those attack Hawkins for his statement are the same one who believe in god.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZforZionism

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Perfekt detail you say? What about those peolpe who died and DIDN'T remember whatever dream or experience they had? What about those people who experienced something that doesn't fit what you think it should be? Why cherry pick?


Well, there need only be a single white crow in existance for white crows to exist.

If only a single person has experienced an afterlife that could be proved (there hasn't yet, evidence, but no proof..but just saying)...if a single afterlife is proved, then afterlife = exists...

its unnecessary to have everyone experience an afterlife for it to be real...now, available for everyone is a different story...however, thats not the point here.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you use the 'equal symbol' to denote 'existential'??
I think you should leave the thinking to the big boys, cup cake.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you put two questionmarks at the end of a sentence, that is grammatically incorrect.
It appears we are both benched then, Mr. Pedantic.
Shall we get cupcakes together (one word btw)

Sucks when you want to make your only point through being a grammar nazi and fail at that, doesn't it...it means not only do you have no refuting point, but you also failed at the distractive point.

you = failed



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Elbereth

Originally posted by TravisT
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.


You mean like post-mortem flatulence? Duncan MacDougall's experiments probably are a little stinky as actual science, but I give him an "A" for effort and curiosity.

This is purely anecdotal, but when my grandmother died at home from cancer under hospice care some years ago, my mother, who was at her bedside, claimed at the moment of death a fuzzy, white "something" flew out of the top of my grandmother's head and out of the window.

Another anecdote for what it is worth: When my father unexpectedly passed, I heard him loudly call my name at what was later determined to be his time of death. He was over one-hundred miles away.

Many have had similar experiences from time immemorial. Are we all just cracked?
Why are you talking down to me, now? No, I don't think you're all cracked, and I think you all can believe in what you want. I never said anybody couldn't, I've just come in here to talk about the article, and what people are missing from it.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by LikeDuhObviously
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 ...


Really? You don't know the meaning of the word "spiritual"? I don't know what to tell you. I guess if I were speaking to somebody who's first language was not English, I'd try to describe "spiritual" as anything pertaining to your being, beyond biological functions. The whole pantheon of subjects covered by it could include the concepts of souls, heavens, gods, etc.

We have not proven there is no life after death. If fact there is more anecdotal information suggesting there is than we have evidence that there is not. The notion that your consciousness is just a result of the combination of your biological make-up is every bit as absurd as any religious dogma.

Is that what you wanted or were you wanting me to quote Webster?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by amaster
Why is it that an atheistic scientist who states his belief on “god” the afterlife based on his profound knowledge and experience of the universe and quantum physics is perceived as unqualified? Yet if a secular scientist were to make the opposite claim based on the same observations this would be acceptable.

both believers and non believers can state their beliefs until the stars twinkle out of existance. that is fine

The issue here is when one goes from stating a belief, to stating a belief as fact for the world to accept.
This thread is about the semantics he used...not his system of belief. He can think the universe sprang forth from a carrot if he wants, and if he states it as his personal belief, sure...fine...whatever.
but if he comes out and matter of factly states that the universe came into existance from a carrot...then ya, mud will be slung


It seems to me that the problem here isn’t so much the message as it is the messenger.

No, its the message.


I find it interesting that those attack Hawkins for his statement are the same one who believe in god.

Incorrect



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Logical one

Originally posted by space cadet
I would like to see proof that there is not a God or Creator.

I keep seeing the repsonse to those who say there is a heaven or God being 'prove it'.

Again I ask, prove that there is not. Or do you simply reside to thinking there is not because Mr Hawking said so?


I would like to see proof that there is no Father Christmas.

I ask for proof that there is not!


Father Christmas, unfailing, will always get all good boys Christmas presents for all time.

I was a good boy and Father Christmas didn't get me any presents.

Therefore there is no Father Christmas.

End of Proof.

Satisfied?



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


You forget on key element. Forgiveness. Human's are good, yet can be corrupted by their own free will. It is up to your free will to incorporate goodness or keep the evil's of free will that have been created by man, Life is the test that either gives you eternal life or eternal torment.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZforZionism
Father Christmas, unfailing, will always get all good boys Christmas presents for all time.

I was a good boy and Father Christmas didn't get me any presents.

Therefore there is no Father Christmas.

End of Proof.

Satisfied?


That only proves you may not have been good in the eyes of Father Christmas



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by amaster
Why is it that an atheistic scientist who states his belief on “god” the afterlife based on his profound knowledge and experience of the universe and quantum physics is perceived as unqualified? Yet if a secular scientist were to make the opposite claim based on the same observations this would be acceptable.

It seems to me that the problem here isn’t so much the message as it is the messenger. Hawkins statement is the result of his years of study and observations of both the known and theoretical universe in which he has found no reasonable proof for the existence of a “god” or the afterlife. On the contrary, a Vatican scientist who’s been exposed to the same study and observation would only be left to conclude that no reasonable proof can be found to show that god does not exist.

I find it interesting that those attack Hawkins for his statement are the same one who believe in god.
My position is that anyone that can't explain the existence of our consciousness is unqualified to state as a fact that there is or is not an afterlife. Whether the person is a religious leader or an atheist matters not to me.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by ZforZionism

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Perfekt detail you say? What about those peolpe who died and DIDN'T remember whatever dream or experience they had? What about those people who experienced something that doesn't fit what you think it should be? Why cherry pick?


Well, there need only be a single white crow in existance for white crows to exist.

If only a single person has experienced an afterlife that could be proved (there hasn't yet, evidence, but no proof..but just saying)...if a single afterlife is proved, then afterlife = exists...

its unnecessary to have everyone experience an afterlife for it to be real...now, available for everyone is a different story...however, thats not the point here.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you use the 'equal symbol' to denote 'existential'??
I think you should leave the thinking to the big boys, cup cake.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you put two questionmarks at the end of a sentence, that is grammatically incorrect.
It appears we are both benched then, Mr. Pedantic.
Shall we get cupcakes together (one word btw)

Sucks when you want to make your only point through being a grammar nazi and fail at that, doesn't it...it means not only do you have no refuting point, but you also failed at the distractive point.

you = failed





I'm still waiting for your proof for your claim that the soul doesn't hold any memories.

I don't think fail is the right word to describe your wild logic and claims. I'm still waiting cupcake.

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



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TravisT
Why are you talking down to me, now? No, I don't think you're all cracked, and I think you all can believe in what you want. I never said anybody couldn't, I've just come in here to talk about the article, and what people are missing from it.


Sorry you took it that way. I absolutely did not intend to talk down to you. It was just a poor attempt at humor on my part.

The "Obama's NEW Birth Certificate proven to be fake hours after release" thread is still active.

Indisputable proof of life after death.
edit on 16-5-2011 by Elbereth because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZforZionism

Father Christmas, unfailing, will always get all good boys Christmas presents for all time.

I was a good boy and Father Christmas didn't get me any presents.

Therefore there is no Father Christmas.

End of Proof.

Satisfied?


That's not proof!

Father Christmas may have had trouble getting down your chimney!



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by antmax21
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


You forget on key element. Forgiveness. Human's are good, yet can be corrupted by their own free will. It is up to your free will to incorporate goodness or keep the evil's of free will that have been created by man, Life is the test that either gives you eternal life or eternal torment.


There is no free will according to the bible.
None shall be saved except by his grace...
All things are known to god, there can be no suprises...meaning we live in a deterministic universe. it is a movie on dvd and we all play our parts exactly how they are meant to be played with absolutely no variation.

To say there is any free will on even the most smallest of details means that God is not all knowing..meaning then that god is not god...

stick that in your paradox pipe and smoke it



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZforZionism

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by ZforZionism

Originally posted by SaturnFX

Originally posted by jonnywhite
Perfekt detail you say? What about those peolpe who died and DIDN'T remember whatever dream or experience they had? What about those people who experienced something that doesn't fit what you think it should be? Why cherry pick?


Well, there need only be a single white crow in existance for white crows to exist.

If only a single person has experienced an afterlife that could be proved (there hasn't yet, evidence, but no proof..but just saying)...if a single afterlife is proved, then afterlife = exists...

its unnecessary to have everyone experience an afterlife for it to be real...now, available for everyone is a different story...however, thats not the point here.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you use the 'equal symbol' to denote 'existential'??
I think you should leave the thinking to the big boys, cup cake.


How can anyone take someone seriously on a scientific subject if you put two questionmarks at the end of a sentence, that is grammatically incorrect.
It appears we are both benched then, Mr. Pedantic.
Shall we get cupcakes together (one word btw)

Sucks when you want to make your only point through being a grammar nazi and fail at that, doesn't it...it means not only do you have no refuting point, but you also failed at the distractive point.

you = failed





I'm still waiting for your proof for your claim that the soul doesn't hold any memories.

I don't think fail is the right word to describe your wild logic and claims. I'm still waiting cupcake.

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


And I am still waiting for you to provide me the quote where I said that.

I never said anything like that...so you stating I claimed that = a lie

Now, I did say you failed...now I realize its not fail...its flat out dishonesty. Quote where i said that, or acknowledge you are in fact a total liar and deserve a ban for bearing false witness (aka, spreading disinfo and slander)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by General.Lee
 


I'm glad I'm only phsyically "Gimped" and not mentally/socially "Gimped" like yourself.
What's the matter, still upset about the Emancipation Proclamation? (Rhetorical)




top topics



 
68
<< 19  20  21    23  24  25 >>

log in

join