Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From one of your links... "Now I am no physicist,"
Well that ends that.
11-18-2010, 08:43 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by ovcatto
From one of your links... "Now I am no physicist,"
Well that ends that.
Moderator cut: attack
The 'quote' was from the person asking the Question - Craig gives the Answers. Furthermore, the Book deals with philsophical issues and thier relation to science. So Craig is fully qualified to respond. Can only physicists understand physics?
Moderator cut: attack
Last edited by Miss Blue; 11-22-2010 at 06:17 AM..
Sorry, Stephen Hawking is arguably the smartest man alive. I don't think anyone who isn't a world-class physicist is qualified to rebut him about physics.
Sorry, Stephen Hawking is arguably the smartest man alive. I don't think anyone who isn't a world-class physicist is qualified to rebut him about physics.
I won't say that a lay person can't have a good understanding of physics but I do not think that a non-physicist can claim to have the same level of understanding as a physicist. William L. Craig may or may not have valid criticisms but I would be more interested in hearing critiques from others in Hawking's field.
11-18-2010, 09:39 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercury Cougar
Sorry, Stephen Hawking is arguably the smartest man alive. I don't think anyone who isn't a world-class physicist is qualified to rebut him about physics.
And another one bites the dust. Why is everyone assuming things without refering to what was posted. I can see that this thread is on its way being led off topic by those who have not even taken the time to listen or read the links - if you are not interested then move on.
11-18-2010, 09:40 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maia160
I won't say that a lay person can't have a good understanding of physics but I do not think that a non-physicist can claim to have the same level of understanding as a physicist. William L. Craig may or may not have valid criticisms but I would be more interested in hearing critiques from others in Hawking's field.
Craig actually does mention those who find his new book wanting in certain areas. It is an interesting listen - even if you don't or won't agree.
Craig actually does mention those who find his new book wanting in certain areas. It is an interesting listen - even if you don't or won't agree.
I'll bookmark the sites you listed to listen to later but probably won't be around to comment. (Not that it matters as I'm not a physicist) I haven't even had time to read Hawking's book yet and this month is going to be so busy that I probably won't get to it anytime soon. At any rate, thanks for the links. I'm willing to hear the other side on this issue.
And another one bites the dust. Why is everyone assuming things without refering to what was posted. I can see that this thread is on its way being led off topic by those who have not even taken the time to listen or read the links - if you are not interested then move on.
Now I realize you have some sort of agenda here in hoping to discredit the ideas found in the book, but have you even bothered to read 'The Grand Design'? I have. Therefore I feel I am quite justified in saying that unless Craig is a well-respected astrophysicist (he's not), or at least a well-known physicist (he's not), he really doesn't have a lot of credibility in trying to refute Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow.
So run along and go believe in your god if you want, but rest assured it doesn't negate the validity of actual true scientific genius.
Attempts to discredit a book by any highly credible scientist on a talk show format leaves us with, for example, the spectacle of Rush Limbaugh waxing eloquent on the insignificance of the Exxon Valdez, or the recent Gulf Oil "problems", or this dude trying to discredit Hawking.
In the process, among those in the know, such TS hosts only discredit themselves with their unjustified and opinionated bloviations. The details of this guy's concerns are pitiful, to say the least, but he has a willing and once-affluent audience there in Orange County. He probably thinks he's relevant!
Scientific factoids don't just pop into existence. They are the result of very conservative, thoughtful and vigorous investigations which are then confirmed by other equally credible technologists. Several times over, in fact. Those guys often have it in their minds to discredit the first author's conclusions if at all possible.
It's a highly competitive environment, but unlike religion, truth in scientific methodology and reporting are mandatory, highly regulated and multiple peer-reviewed. Or else science goes the way of religious drama: unbelievable at best and laughable at worst. On balance, the scientific process results in reliable and valuable output, unlike that of jealous, unbalanced, biased and intolerant religious doctrine.
That aspect is more than evident in this presentation. Hawking is hardly shaking in his wheelchair. It's equally obvious that this book has Christians seriously shaken and concerned. Therefore they'll try anything to discredit and dismiss one of the most influential and astounding minds of our time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
