Stephen Hawking: Does God Exist

cottage_steeze

cottage_steeze

Member
Saw this on the discovery channel a few days ago. absolutely blown away by how they can explain this in a reasonable fashion so that normal people can actually understand it.

 
I think you mean planck time

ie.

planck_time.gif


not plank time which would be more like

Amstel-Planking_1909243i.jpg


just to clear it up.
 
Stephen Hawking is a cock sucker...you can put a man on the moon, and make siri talk like a human but he still has to talk like a robot. Makes me think he is so pretentious that he has to talk like a robot just to force his intellect down everyone throat, reminding the world that he just that smart.
 
yes, in a way it makes no literal sense, it can only really be applied theoretically, as humans don't have the technology to measure such a short time. It kind of stands as a reverse infinity in a way. Meaning that it just represents the shortest amount of time possible, and is not necessarily a real measurement.
 
Fantastic video. Thanks.

What I really want to know is where we go next or who will be one to either prove him wrong or offer an even better alternative.
 
Thats not true at all. Have you read a book by him? It's damn sure not in a robot voice, and his points still stand perfectly. Give him a fuckin break, he's talking with his pinky.
 
When he got it though, a robot voice was the only option. How would you like it if your voice completely changed every time technology improved?
 
He's an author...he is extremely smart... he only "talks like a robot" at conferences and for interviews like this. He is an icon that you just called a "cock sucker." (Which, by the way, is a very poor term to be used for Mr. Hawking considering he can barley move his lips let alone "suck and cock.")

Take the time to read some of his books.....I think you'll reconsider your opinion.

He is considered pretentious and an asshole, but I don't think his use of technology is a way for him to "show off." It's a way for him to speak.
 
the video isnt in a robot voice, only the parts where it shows him talking. he got that voice when it was the only type of computer voice to choose from, of course he hasnt changed his voice
 
dude FUCK YOU. you really are a fucking idiot, i hope you know that.

everyone else has made it clear why, but man. fuck, you suck.
 
well it would seem a little self-serving that a scientist would put his full faith in the laws of science, lots of which can be proven as fact, other parts which we assume hold true until proven otherwise - like scientists knowing that the earth was flat until it was disproven by later discovery. im sure at some point in the future when there exists a more objective method of analyzing and explaining how time and space intertwine and aren't just assumptions that fit a scheme that our current scientists deem true because that's all human beings can understand given our present technology and level of intellect, lots of what we "know" now to be true will be shattered as well.

now that isn't to say that science is any less valid than religion, because most of religion is retarded, but i still think it's just a never ending tug-of-war between opposing ends of the spectrum. i like to hover somewhere around the middle and just admit that we don't have all the answers with regards to the origin of the universe and why elements like hydrogen randomly exploded out of nothing in a time that didn't exist to form a crucial part of all the matter in existence today. some things simply make sense to scientists, other things are just easier and more comforting to believe by a person of religious faith. the bottom line is that they're both just rationalizations for explaining what we are incapable of full understanding.
 
Everyone that wants to post in this thread should read this post before posting. Or else a shitstorm of a great magnitude will ensue..
 
Everyone who reads this post about reading Anathema's post before posting in this thread should read these two articles before you read Anathema's post and before you possibly post int his thread:

In other words read these:

Julian Barbour - The End of Time

Lawrence Krauss - School Boards Want to 'Teach the Controversy.' What Controversy?
 
why do we have to talk about this, cant we just post videos about white people acting like black people?! or stupid funny animals.
 
It's explained well but that asshole narrator shoving his atheist beliefs down my throat is just as bad as Jehova's witnesses/whathaveyou shoving their belief down the throats of anyone.

Like just let me be, b.
 
you realize the narrator is hawking

he isn't "Shoving his atheist beliefs down your throat"

You would never see a scientist go door to door and tell people to believe what they believe.

He is simply presenting his beliefs and showing why they are true to him in a good, intelligent manner. Could you imagine a world with no presentation of beliefs?
 
First part I feel silly about

2nd part, Jehovah's witness may have been a bad example, but when he says "When people ask me if there is a creator, I just say that the question is silly" he is doing the same thing as the super religious people who tell gay people they are going to hell when they have the chance. Just because Hawking's views are backed by more fact doesn't mean that they way he presents his beliefs are any different than other people.
 
Those biblefucking gay bashers could have an extremely high iq and be very smart no matter how stupid their views are. My point isn't on who has a better view, but how they get their point across.
 
Which religions are not retarded and in what ways are they different from the ones you claim to be retarded?
 
i would say christianity, islam and judaism and retarded as fuck

the others are just clearly less retarded and have had less of a negitive impact on humanity, christianity is always the worst in my book though due to conditioning
 
Steven Hawking believes that there can be a good that created our natural laws of the universe. also pope benedict had a meeting with him and his colleagues saying : "you shouldnt study the origins of the universe, that is gods work"
 
Philosophers had known that the earth was round for thousands of years before the middle ages. The flat earth was never a scientific fact.

I know what you are trying to say, how all we have to reason with is what we can observe. I just think the flat earth is a poor example of it because it was the church that influenced that widespread belief, not scientists.

We can literally see evidence for the big bang. It is a model that right now provides the best mechanism for the creation of the universe. Of course, you have to put faith in the scientific method, and this is something that philosophers could debate until the end of time. However science has led us to everything around us in our daily lives. The same theories that provide us with nuclear energy allow us to look at rocks and say that they are billions of years old.

I don't think any scientists have ever said that we know everything about the universe. I just don't see how religion can be seen as a good alternative. Why must we fill the gap of what we don't know, with something that we have no evidence at all for?

I'm not saying that religion is an entirley bad thing, If it provides comfort for people who are scared of the unknown, then that might be seen as a good thing. However I just personally can't see why people can rationalize believing in something that we have no evidence for. Especially when they believe something that contradicts what we DO have lots of evidence for, such as the big bang or evolution.

 
oh yeah, it definitely isn't, but the point is that the facts from science are just another rationale. certainly a more logical one, but there are lots of things science can't explain either. people don't like to admit that we just have no fucking clue and probably wont ever have a fucking clue because we aren't advanced enough to explore the relationships between things we try to make sense of in our three dimentional world that are limited by our own observation.

so rather than, like i said, engaging in the never ending tug-of-war with scientists saying religion is wrong and religious people saying science is wrong, why not just chill and say "this is what makes sense to me" rather than "there can't be a creator for the universe because im a scientist and atoms and radiation and math equations and telescopes tell me it isn't possible". for all we know this shit is like men in black where the giant super aliens are playing marbles with universes and everything that happens is a result of their actions in a game. how could we possibly know what we just can never grasp as simple human beings?

im absolutely not arguing that science is invalid, because it has proven a lot of things. but as to the creation of the universe and other weird shit that goes on that i don't even have the mental capacity or intellect to grasp and even attempt to explain, im just going to sit back and say "wtf, who knows, im not going to take sides on this one".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top