Stephen Hawking: God didn't create universe

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp
Sounds like he's gone mad scientist. Fits his look anyway. However, as others has stated, this is nothing more than an opinion and a failed attempt to back it up with facts. Physics and laws of the universe dont "just happen"

Plus why is it that God is even dragged into his writings anyway? Religion is solely based on faith. Meaning the followers of that said religion follow it based on a trust of its existence in truth without an explanation or proven facts.

Many people who are atheists will not understand this because they rarely have faith in anything as they always want facts and science to determine their lives. However, faith is a form of hope, and hope can be a very powerful to the human condition.

Either way, Hawking may just be running his synthesizer to get attention through controversy and conspiracy. All writers do it to hype their work, and plus, he's almost contradicted himself in this new book compared to his previous ones where he stated God may have had a hand in the creation. Now he's going in the other direction.

A change of opinion over time can hardly be called a contradiction, and you shouldn't fault "atheists" for wanting to live their life in the most rational way possible.

It also appears that Steven Hawking will be backing up his conclusion with valid premises, and that requires facts (something that his huge ass book should supply us).

Religion is dragged into his writings for the same reason it is "dragged" into our lives whether we want to feel it's effects or not, that's just part of the human condition. Human condition, what a joke.

Originally posted by john_bmth
11 pages and counting. Hate to spoil the party but has anyone noticed yet that he hasn't actually said "God did not create the universe" or "I have proof that God did not create the universe"? He stated that (and I'm paraphrasing) given our current understanding of physics and cosmology, God is not a requirement for the existence of the universe, i.e. we have (or are on the cusp of having) the knowledge to explain the origins of our universe without resorting to "God did it" (i.e. we haven't got clue). That's not the same as saying "God did not create the universe" or "there is no God" by any stretch.

Anyway, carry on...

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Either you are very naive or need some further reading comprehension skills because he didnt have to say it. He implied it by saying God isnt a requirement for our current existence. Whether he meant to imply it or not is the real question.

reply to post by john_bmth


SSSSSHHHHH Do not disturb them, they are on a roll. I am sure that the thread will soon derail into a political agenda any second now.

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp

Originally posted by john_bmth
11 pages and counting. Hate to spoil the party but has anyone noticed yet that he hasn't actually said "God did not create the universe" or "I have proof that God did not create the universe"? He stated that (and I'm paraphrasing) given our current understanding of physics and cosmology, God is not a requirement for the existence of the universe, i.e. we have (or are on the cusp of having) the knowledge to explain the origins of our universe without resorting to "God did it" (i.e. we haven't got clue). That's not the same as saying "God did not create the universe" or "there is no God" by any stretch.

Anyway, carry on...

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Either you are very naive or need some further reading comprehension skills because he didnt have to say it. He implied it by saying God isnt a requirement for our current existence. Whether he meant to imply it or not is the real question.

He hasn't implied anything, you're taking his words and then adding your own spin to them to make him seem like he's saying something totally different. That is extremely dishonest.

We don't need to invoke God to explain rainbows. Does that mean that anyone who understands the atmospheric conditions needed to create rainbows by default implies God doesn't exist?


[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp

Originally posted by john_bmth
11 pages and counting. Hate to spoil the party but has anyone noticed yet that he hasn't actually said "God did not create the universe" or "I have proof that God did not create the universe"? He stated that (and I'm paraphrasing) given our current understanding of physics and cosmology, God is not a requirement for the existence of the universe, i.e. we have (or are on the cusp of having) the knowledge to explain the origins of our universe without resorting to "God did it" (i.e. we haven't got clue). That's not the same as saying "God did not create the universe" or "there is no God" by any stretch.

Anyway, carry on...

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Either you are very naive or need some further reading comprehension skills because he didnt have to say it. He implied it by saying God isnt a requirement for our current existence. Whether he meant to imply it or not is the real question.

He hasn't implied anything, you're taking his words and then adding your own spin to them to make him seem like he's saying something totally different. That is extremely dishonest.

We don't need to invoke God to explain rainbows. Does that mean that anyone who understands the atmospheric conditions needed created rainbows by default implies God doesn't exist?

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Oh really? then what are people here arguing about then if that was absolutely not what he implied? If this is my own personal spin on it then why has it caused so much controversy? Good try though.

[edit on 3-9-2010 by AzoriaCorp]

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by AzoriaCorp

Originally posted by john_bmth
11 pages and counting. Hate to spoil the party but has anyone noticed yet that he hasn't actually said "God did not create the universe" or "I have proof that God did not create the universe"? He stated that (and I'm paraphrasing) given our current understanding of physics and cosmology, God is not a requirement for the existence of the universe, i.e. we have (or are on the cusp of having) the knowledge to explain the origins of our universe without resorting to "God did it" (i.e. we haven't got clue). That's not the same as saying "God did not create the universe" or "there is no God" by any stretch.

Anyway, carry on...

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Either you are very naive or need some further reading comprehension skills because he didnt have to say it. He implied it by saying God isnt a requirement for our current existence. Whether he meant to imply it or not is the real question.

He hasn't implied anything, you're taking his words and then adding your own spin to them to make him seem like he's saying something totally different. That is extremely dishonest.

We don't need to invoke God to explain rainbows. Does that mean that anyone who understands the atmospheric conditions needed created rainbows by default implies God doesn't exist?

[edit on 3-9-2010 by john_bmth]

Oh really? then what are people here arguing about then if that was absolutely not what he implied? If this is my own personal spin on it then why has it caused so much controversy? Good job though.

Because people are too quick to jump to conclusions based on a headline and sensational reporting? It's not exactly a rarity on these boards.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia

Stephen Hawking: God didn't create universe

www.cnn.com

Hawking says in his book "The Grand Design" that, given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing,"

"Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,"

His answer is "M-theory," which, he says, posits 11 space-time dimensions, "vibrating strings, ... point particles, two-dimensional membranes, three-dimensional blobs and other objects that are more difficult to picture and occupy even

(visit the link for the full news article)

Those are hardly theoretical constructs that imply here is no God. Theory can neer "prove" anything. It is simply the best guess given the available information. A significant number of physicists would disagree that he has proven anything. He has attempted to reconcile relativity and wuantum mechanics his entire career and has failed.

reply to post by Hot_Wings


if god is everything then you have just insulted your god by referring to others as swine; what makes pearls better than swine if god is everything?

all you have is faith in 'prophets' to support your lust for a god. just because some guy claimed he spoke to god (apparently the universe, interesting as ive never heard the universe speak lol) doesnt make god exist. defining god as the universe implies that the universe is concious, last time i check a rock could not feel nor speak.

it is laughable how religious people claim theyre better than others, it is also laughable that you hold stock in the words of some guy youhave never met let alone spoken to who lived thousands of years ago!

i can quite easily say aliens from another dimension created life, god is an alien so deal with it!!! that doesnt make it so! if my heart believes in god well it is doing a poor job in letting my brain know about it.

anyway this 'debate' is pointless, religious people arent open to reason and will insult others for their different views, i thought religious people were supposed to be loving and kind to all? what did jesus teach? clearly most christians on here fail to grasp most of what jesus taught!

with that im done chasing my curly tail, i fancy some pork chops now

reply to post by enduser


No logical person can argue with what you just said, so I do hope this argument ends.

I been following this thread sense it started; After reading a few of the "Hawking: God doesn't exist" news articles; and than reading through all the posts in this thread; I offer the following viewpoints.

Bible-Thumpers - Don't even respond to anything I say; You guys are generally, well,

All others have to realize a couple of things.

Have any of you read The Grand Design? (I doubt it cause it isn't out yet). I ask this for a few questions.

First and foremost; Hawking, while being an extremely gifted theoretical physicist, and also just a genius in general, doesn't get any credit for his ability to sell books!

Seriously; While we are all debating things that most likely don't matter (or at least the viewpoints don't matter as they will change over time, specifically if any of you do read the book and get the context of it all), Hawking must be laughing is arse off at the success of his marketing campaign to sell his new book.

Now, with that said, onto the gist of what I want to say.

Without people like Hawking (and Einstein, and Newton,etc.) our understanding of the universe would be radically different it is today. There contributions are priceless.

They try to proof things using the scientific method. The methods and such have shown to be successful.

So, all of you Bible Thumper's that are reading this, even though I said don't read my writing; Wake up; Realize your Bible isn't the answer to everything (or should I say anything), and start to understand the importance of the work done by "smart people."



[edit on 3-9-2010 by Confusion42]

reply to post by john_bmth


My whole comment was based on a headline in Yahoo news.

"God did not create the universe, says Hawking"

We have elzippo to go on until the books release.

Originally posted by Parallex
Yes, the idea of GOD is far-fetched because some muppet in a cave somewhere decided to call himself the 'saviour' of mankind and demand obedience and sacrifice from those around him.

All Stephen Hawking did was ask questions, and posit solutions.

Now, if you're done cripple-bashing I have some tea to drink....

Parallex.

First of all, that "muppet in a cave" (I'm assuming you mean Jesus), never demanded obedience or sacrifice. Really, he did the same thing Dr. Hawking does: he asked questions. Like Hawking, Jesus was, at the time, on the forefront of questioning the status-quo, and challenging people to leave their old views behind and expand their minds.

Secondly, why are so many athiests so hateful towards believers? I've seen so much venom spit at the religious on this website, it's unbelieveable. I understand that you don't agree with the idea of God, or any diety for that matter, but why be so hateful about it? Is it not enough to simply disagree? Debate is fine, hate is not.

Saying that existence came into being from non-existence is absolute lunacy. And then scientists like Hawking attempt to "rationalize" this notion by tossing about imaginitive theories on multiverses, supergravity, superstrings, and the like. And people are paying attention to this crap?

Originally posted by jaktenstid
Saying that existence came into being from non-existence is absolute lunacy. And then scientists like Hawking attempt to "rationalize" this notion by tossing about imaginitive theories on multiverses, supergravity, superstrings, and the like. And people are paying attention to this crap?

Do you even understand M-Theory?

And saying that existence came into being from non-existence is absolute lunacy yet saying that there was a Creator who came about from non-existence (if that is indeed your viewpoint), is beyond lunacy.

reply to post by Confusion42


You make some valid points. I don't care for religion. It has no place in my life and I have no desire to explore any of its perceived values. I am all for furthering our knowledge in the field of theoretical physics to understand how life, the universe and everything came to be.

I think we are on the cusp of discovering new physical laws, especially with the volume of exoplanets being discovered, which will redefine our place amongst everything.

Back to religion for a moment and to clarify my position. Worshiping deities isn't my bag, but a connection with nature is. I don't view it as spiritual, but something natural. When we eventually make contact with intelligent life, it will be interesting to see if they are religious or not.

Originally posted by jaktenstid
Saying that existence came into being from non-existence is absolute lunacy. And then scientists like Hawking attempt to "rationalize" this notion by tossing about imaginitive theories on multiverses, supergravity, superstrings, and the like. And people are paying attention to this crap?

No more imaginative than worshiping non-existent deities or believing in miracles.

The real beauty to theoretical physics is that it questions and pushes the boundaries of what we perceive to be real. This can only lead to advancement of our species, something religion has prevented us from doing for thousands of years.

Originally posted by LarryLove
reply to post by Confusion42

 

You make some valid points. I don't care for religion. It has no place in my life and I have no desire to explore any of its perceived values. I am all for furthering our knowledge in the field of theoretical physics to understand how life, the universe and everything came to be.

I think we are on the cusp of discovering new physical laws, especially with the volume of exoplanets being discovered, which will redefine our place amongst everything.

Back to religion for a moment and to clarify my position. Worshiping deities isn't my bag, but a connection with nature is. I don't view it as spiritual, but something natural. When we eventually make contact with intelligent life, it will be interesting to see if they are religious or not.

I agree with all of what you said and have a similar viewpoint on just about all of the things you said here

I am new here at ATS; Just started my account here (but I been lurking here for years). I have to start remembering people such as yourself that I have similar viewpoints with and people that, well, Bible Thumper er's

Originally posted by dwiggen

Originally posted by Parallex
Yes, the idea of GOD is far-fetched because some muppet in a cave somewhere decided to call himself the 'saviour' of mankind and demand obedience and sacrifice from those around him.

All Stephen Hawking did was ask questions, and posit solutions.

Now, if you're done cripple-bashing I have some tea to drink....

Parallex.

First of all, that "muppet in a cave" (I'm assuming you mean Jesus), never demanded obedience or sacrifice. Really, he did the same thing Dr. Hawking does: he asked questions. Like Hawking, Jesus was, at the time, on the forefront of questioning the status-quo, and challenging people to leave their old views behind and expand their minds.

Secondly, why are so many athiests so hateful towards believers? I've seen so much venom spit at the religious on this website, it's unbelieveable. I understand that you don't agree with the idea of God, or any diety for that matter, but why be so hateful about it? Is it not enough to simply disagree? Debate is fine, hate is not.

i'm not saying i condone it and i'm not saying i'm totally against it b/c that would make me a hypocrite...but idk if you know this and not all deserve it but religion has kinda brought the hatred on themselves the old saying you reap what you sew...religion sewed some hatred they are now reaping!

reply to post by Confusion42


Hey, welcome aboard. ATS is like a Noah's Ark for alternative thinkers and every now and then some real gems of thoughts pop out the wood work.

I don't pretend to understand physics one bit, but like to read as much as I can and often have to spend more time learning about what I just read.

Religion really grinds my gears and think it should be kept well away from science as one opposes the other. I don't take issue with people for being religious, but take offence when people try to ram it down your mouth.

Originally posted by john_bmth

Because people are too quick to jump to conclusions based on a headline and sensational reporting? It's not exactly a rarity on these boards.

I said something similar a few posts down; I just realized someone here understands whats actually going on with this whole news story