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.
So you are saying that you have no evidence...It's about time a theist admitted that little gem.
Well, sanspeur, when your only "evidence" is the Bible, as in no other reference or sources, then the facts I guess are very simple, in one's own simple mind.
Of course to those of us who find Hawking's work interesting and read Michio Kaku for fun, we can see "facts" in a whole new light.
But some theists are not allowed to read the books we non-theists read. And yes, the theists have no "evidence" other than a book of what we call myths, but in their minds, they need nothing else.
Maybe ignorance really IS bliss......? I wouldn't know.......
So Hawking concludes there is no God because God had no time to create the Universe. Why? Because time did not exist before the Big Bang.
Theology 101: God is not subject to time and space. Hawking's conclusion is based on ignorance of basic theology.
I am not impressed, but I do agree with his opening statement that everyone is free to believe what they wish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
Here with your last statement, you have it in a nut shell...Theists believe what they WANT to believe, the facts be damned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
And what facts are you refering to?
Facts are proven by evidence. Just saying.
I see. So I pose the question for you to provide evidence. You claimed to have facts-agreed?
So instead of providing any facts to back your opinion you say this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
So you are saying that you have no evidence...It's about time a theist admitted that little gem.
I believe you have nothing. Thus your attempt to turn things around. You made the assertion. The burden of proof falls on you. You say you have facts. Let's see them with evidence to support. Otherwise you are just giving an opinion.
"Well, of course it depends on who or what you WANT to believe in, dunnitt?"
And to which facts might YOU be referring, Mr5150?
Facts ain't always what they seem, unless they are well backed up by an exhaustive and evaluative scientific process, with all the obligatory individual components and key elements of De Debil™ Scy-yunc!. You know, all those bits and elements that faith-based beliefs, no matter how personal and closely held, do not enjoy.
I've long been a careful student of that very process(The SM) that has dependably unveiled all kinds of stuff over the past few decades, like lasers, radar, flat-screen TVs, fuel injection, antibiotics (which are so durned troublesome because they Evolve exponentially, day and night, without taking a break, always adapting to the new niches that we hominid bodies provide them on a global scale!), advanced medical techniques and robotic prostheses, laptop computers the size of a biz card, and so on. All answering to the song of unbendingly ethical SM efforts!
It's truly fascinating that devout fundamentalist Christians become so very mute when this particularly useful process (reminder: The SM...) takes on the multitude of olde tyme myths that proliferate within that very religion. Well hell: when it takes on any proscribed and outdated religion if you look deep inside them all...
(After all, can you imagine trying to ultimately exactly control the behavior and mind-sets of literally billions of illiterate peons with a set of changeable rules? Oh My God!)
They do indeed happily accept all of that which worketh for them, but when such a proven and ultra-reliable investigative process (ahem.... The SM...)clearly shows up the faults and mythologies in their old fairy-tales, we get these responses:
1) Those geologists, engineers and bio-scientists are biased liars who only accept the results they like!
(to which we remind: The SM provides a clear pathway, via it's mandatory stated Methods and Materials section {which is required in order to allow for repeating any controversial tests}) to the same results, or to better more dependable ones since research technologies are always improving with practice and ongoing and unrelenting thinking. Unlike, again, the Christian myth's approach. ("Believe, or else... you go to HELL!")
2) Scientific results, even when repeated by various independent individuals, groups or universities, do not prove anything! (Unless, of course, it's an improvement in their TV reception due to digital-satellite technology; then it's all OK!)
3) The bible is inerrant, but can (well Duhhhh!) only be understood by those who accept God into their lives. (This being the classic last-ditch denial cave into which they dive, head-long, when logically cornered.)
4) Science is an entity which can be therefore blamed for any and all of it's many and obvious mistakes and research errors. (They then assert that "entities" are susceptible to bribes, re-interpretation and all the other failings of man. To their warped thinking, participation in science is probably a sin.)
5) Totally phony pseudo-scientific but blatantly pro-religion studies, when done by faker universities such as The Institute for Creation Research, are always completely & unassailably accurate and dependable, even if their results are checked and found to be phony. (Such special scholars as Kent Hovind, now lounging in Fed. prison for fraud and tax evasion, and Ken Ham, manager of Answers in Genesis), all purport to have advanced scientific doctoral degrees, but which in fact they granted to themselves and their friends. Or their doc-degrees are not in any scientific discipline. Their God-supporting research was done by individuals operating completely outside of their particular academic expertise.)
But aw-heck now; if educated atheists present different multiple study results that might utterly condemn old and impossible concepts (like, ahem... Noah's unpowered Ark, wallowing in stormy & turbid semi-saline fludd waters along with all that dead and rotting organic detritus and marine animal bodies...), done by such actual experts, why then, it's all biased crap! You betcha!
Meaning that when it's carefully and conservatively completed by the literal millions of existing scientyists, or by enthusiastic and ethical students academically en-route to their own well-deserved graduate science degrees, all of them, both scientists and students alike, of that stinky ilk, are all, obviously, liars and blunt-headed atheists who are not to be trusted.
Unlike, you know, Ken and Kent and so on. You'd apparently trust those scoundrels with your kids' lives in a hurricane, since, you know, God will avert the storm's furor when it's Kenny or Kent down there on their holy knees! Riiiggghhhttttt....
Ho-Hum! Such blatant chronyism, intransigence and outright bloviatory crappology. Can you keep your nose above it all? I certainly hope so.
"This to, my son, shall pass!" And with apologies to "grackle", a song-writer....
I see. So I pose the question for you to provide evidence. You claimed to have facts-agreed?
So instead of providing any facts to back your opinion you say this:
I believe you have nothing. Thus your attempt to turn things around. You made the assertion. The burden of proof falls on you. You say you have facts. Let's see them with evidence to support. Otherwise you are just giving an opinion.
Fact#1..The bible is not evidence.
Fact #2 evolution.
Fact#3 Evolution disproves creation.
Fact #4 All you have is faith.
Fact #5 Faith is just an excuse to believe the unbelievable.
Fact #6 There is no evidence of anything spiritual let alone any god.
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.