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.
Hawking lived 50 years longer than the doctors said he would. he defied science in more ways than one.
I read his book "a brief history of time" two decades ago and found the book so, so interesting. Hawking was an amazing and admirable intellect, even though I disagreed with his personal philosophies in so many ways.
Leonard sussing won a long term bet with Hawkins, was it a subscription to playboy?
In his recent book Hawkins claimed philosophy is dead or hasn't kept up.
Strange because the rest of his book is classed philosophy. And not very good philosophy.
It was he who hadn't kept up with philosophy.
His name is "Hawking". Are you talking about Stephen Hawking or someone else...?
It absolutely is not nonsense and yet again you do not address the point made. And as for your point. Hawkin admitted that he was wrong about Black Holes after 30 years. You are wrong on that too.
As for the rest of your argument you are haggling over the usage of particular words to win the argument with ad hominem fallacy. How about actually addressing what I've posted.
1. Please provide a source for the bold. Specifically where Dr. Hawking said he was "wrong about Black Holes." When you can't we will acknowledge that you are wrong.
2. His name is HawkinG.
3. And ad hominem would be if I call you an idiot. Pointing out that you do not understand what the words you are using mean is not a fallacy at all.
4. I have given specific points that you ignored. Like how hawking radiation and black hole horizons specifically involve quantum physics and general relativity. You don't understand that, so you ignored it.
He was not as highly admired in physicist circles as the general public.
His first book is known as the most popular unread science book.
That and the knee jerk reaction here.
His work on black holes which brought him prominence was co-authored by penrose, how many know if Penrose?
Penrose called him lazy and his recent proposals as a poor excuse for not having better ideas.
He wasn't fawned over in physicist circles, that's just something which occurs among the general public. He was just as capable of making a fool of himself as Joe the plumber. And did so quite well.
He was acknowledged as one of the most important minds in physics period, even within physics. Even those with whom he quarreled with regularly still acknowledged the realities of his work. And as a scientist, I can tell you scientist do not fawn over scientist period. The notion that just because Dr. Hawking was not fawned over someone detracts from his body of work is silly at best.
Some are loath for anyone to hold a different opinion than they subscribe to even when they can't even explain it as demonstrated here. Hence the personal attacks. Look at the last few pages.
Not all opinions are equally valid as evidenced by your continual assertions with no support at all. People who continually spout about their uninformed opinions often then whinge when others point out their lack of support.
That btw, is not an ad hom at all, it is isn't even a fallacy, another word you do not seem to understand. Let me help you with that too. A fallacy occurs when someone presents a logical argument/explanation, and someone tries to counter their explanation, and does so without using logic. The problem is you have presented no logical explanation because an opinion is not a logical argument. You could try to use a logical argument to support your opinion but you have not done that. Therefore pointing out the flaws in your opinion cannot be a fallacy let alone an ad hominem fallacy.
You are welcome to continue to voice your uninformed opinion all you like. But as someone who clearly has no understanding of science in general let alone Dr. Hawkings work, it will just be more whinging, no more no less.
Plenty of things were said, by his own countrymen, when Hawking sided with the globalists and argued against #BRExit. He was proved wrong on the outcome of that too.
As for the argument you are responding to, that's just another person using a broad negative generalization to address a specific point, because he also lacked a real response.
So since you have been unable to support your opinions of his work with any actual evidence you are now complaining about the opinions of a scientist when it comes to politics? ROFL!
Already done. Let's start with the guy whose mathematics proved him wrong.
The guy? You think someone you call "the guy" whose name you cannot be bothered to post, because he isnt NOTEWORTHY ENOUGH to actually know is someone whose as noteworthy as Dr. Hawkings???? Lol.
Now, since you have actually attempted to present the smallest sliver of evidence to support your opinion lets actually address it. Since you cannot give the person's name, it follows logically, that the person is inherently less renowned that Dr. Hawking. Thus you have disproven your own point.
Smart man in many ways, but oh so dumb in so many others. RIP.
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.
