@shinyblurry

You never explained anything but rather offered your amatuer opinion. Here is the opinion of an expert:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2010-09-03-hawking02_ST_N.htm


Congrats, you can use Google - but no, that isn't much of a link (I'm very surprised you couldn't find something better than that, really). Hell, the story doesn't even support the headline. But even if Stephen Hawking swears on his life that the Universe came from nothing, it wouldn't mean us "followers of Scientism" would believe that. Science doesn't work like that.

Again, there is no scientific consensus on seeing past the big bang. There just isn't. Stephen Hawking might have an idea - actually he has had a few contradictory different opinions on things over the years and he's honestly not universally respected at this point - but he's not "science" and US Today is not a great place to learn about science.

And did I explain it before? Yes, I did. I just checked. So did a couple other VS posters. And you commented on the Tyson Big Bang video. Did you watch it before writing your stupid comment (oh, and it was stupid)? In there, he explicitly says that the Big Bang theory doesn't explain what happened before a certain threshold. As Tyson says around 31 minutes, we need a new theory to get us before that.

That's the current scientific consensus. His talk is simple and easy to understand, and you pretended to watch it. Do you think he's lying about the current state of knowledge? Do you think he's wrong? Or do you think some new secret scientific consensus has maybe emerged since that video? Hint: it hasn't.

To be clear, I'm not making the opposite assumption. If Hawking said the Universe came from nothing, for all I know he's right. Maybe one day that will become part of established theory. Right now it isn't - in any way, shape or form - and it's not part of the general Big Bang theory; it's just the speculation, possibly not even terribly serious speculation, of a famous physicist.

To learn about what is the Big Bang theory, try the Wikipedia article - which, as I quoted before, does represent more or less the current consensus. (Hint: when you want to learn about scientific theory at a "popular" level, try Wikipedia before USA Today). As it says, science doesn't have a consensus on seeing past the Big Bang. You can see some other speculative theories at the end of that article.

Science doesn't have the full picture. People will try to figure out more, but until then Science is OK with not knowing everything.

But now I'm curious, about your full picture. How old is the Earth? How long ago were Adam and Eve (assuming you believe in a literal Adam and Eve)? Was there a worldwide flood? Why does it really, really look like there wasn't? Were there dinosaurs? When did they live and die? Was there pre-human human like beings (Cromagnons and what not)? If not, what are all those skeletons, artifacts and history? Why is it the further we dig the less complex the fossils are? Did all humans once speak the same language? Was there a tower of Babel where the languages split? Is the universe expanding?

Overall, is science right about pretty much everything, other than the few places it contradicts your scripture? Isn't that an odd coincidence? Or do you think science is wrong about a bunch of other stuff too?

That is the timeline secular scientists have come up with, but the bible says humans have only been around for 6 thousands years, not one hundred thousand. And in that timeframe, God has been very active in His creation..the first coming of Christ was the culmination of 4000 years worth of work that He did in the world, mostly through the jewish people. The past 2000 years have been in the establishing of the Kingdom of God through Jesus Christ, a work that has been active and ongoing and remains so.

>> ^truth-is-the-nemesis:
As Christopher Hitchens said " human's have been around for 100,000 years and in that time they've killed, reproduced and acted with impunity without any input from god, it was only in the last 2,000 that he eventually started to care about his creation and then it was only a fleeting visit".
the mathematics of that alone is vastly implausible.

No, it's that you presume God is irrelevent. That's the natural conclusion from your fishtank example, isn't it? You see a world without God, and I see a world with God. Clearly, only one of us is correct. That is why absolutes are important. Someone is right, and someone is wrong. If you don't believe in absolutes, I would ask you, do you absolutely believe that?

>> ^vaire2ube:
God is Irrelevant, is the point. We can't debate the subject by virtue of its definition, so if you have a differing opinion just deal with it.
Reality is still real. We can interact without absolute knowledge.
Read the article from Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow September 27, 2010
"A few years ago the city council of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners from keeping goldfish in curved fishbowls. The sponsors of the measure explained that it is cruel to keep a fish in a bowl because the curved sides give the fish a distorted view of reality. Aside from the measure’s significance to the poor goldfish, the story raises an interesting philosophical question: How do we know that the reality we perceive is true? The goldfish is seeing a version of reality that is different from ours, but can we be sure it is any less real? For all we know, we, too, may spend our entire lives staring out at the world through a distorting lens."

You have been awarded 1 Power Point for fixing the embed code for Dead Pool video Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and Arthur Clarke - On Religion. Thank you for helping maintain VideoSift's reliability.

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Porksandwich:
I mean if some dude gets into office and wants to believe God created us and science is crazy talk.....what bearing does that have on 95% of what this guy is going to be doing? I mean he's clearly an idiot to dismiss thousands of years of study and millions of years of proof, but his belief only possibly impacts what is taught in schools as far as I can see.
Do you really want someone you just described as an idiot running your country? I would rather see someone who's political ideology I disagree with, but I still consider smart (i.e. Ron Paul, if he wasn't an idiot creationist).


The point I was trying to make is that believing creationism or not, what they will be influencing has little to do with it. They are super focused on a topic that in the grand scheme of things is important, but the likelihood of that topic being something they would ever have to make a decision on while in office is nil. Now if their beliefs keep them from making decision objectively, that's a different situation.

I mean hell, from what I can gather Stephen Hawking believes in God in some form, but he doesn't let his belief stop him from studying objectively.

I just can't imagine a situation where they would have to make a decision based on creationism versus evolution argument that wouldn't be directly related to school teachings. And anything to do with creationism has religious connotations and I think it should all fall under the separation of church and state no matter what decisions they think they are making.

Or to put it another way: If they believe creationism unconditionally, then they probably believe a lot of other fucked up things that could cause a lot more problems if they got into office. So why are they so focused on a inconsequential part of their belief system and looking for more dangerous areas? There's more than just one belief that makes a person irrational, and being super focused on one that has almost no practical impact on your life is stupid.

IE Bachmann, she's anti-gay...we've seen her cover it. If she were to get any real power she could cause all kinds of issues for gays and their families. That's a real issue. And the even bigger issue is that she has completely avoided speaking about it....which means she's trying to hide a real big portion of her belief system going forward. She hasn't even claimed to have "seen the light" and changed her opinion, she just simply won't talk about it. It shows she can't look at an issue objectively and decide what's best for everyone long term.....she can only look at it subjectively and apply her own beliefs to it or not speak on it at all.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

attribution would be nice.. and upvotes, cash prizes, etc. etc.

BTW, I'm just now finishing part 4... and one question I have (and have actually had for a long time now) is whether or not it's possible the big bang exists because there are black holes and vice versa -- that is, if the two are consequential of each other -- and, given that, if it's possible that the universe(s) are continuously being created (in big bangs -- i.e., white holes) and destroyed (in black holes)... ? Anyone care to point me in the right direction?

>> ^TheJehosephat:

Thank you! I totally forgot to add that. Mind if I put it in the description?
>> ^Trancecoach:
Part 2.
Part 3.
Part 4.

Thank you! I totally forgot to add that. Mind if I put it in the description?
>> ^Trancecoach:

Part 2.
Part 3.
Part 4.

>> ^Trancecoach:

Sadly, he's not kidding.
>> ^Boise_Lib:
"...particularly women." LOL, he should do a stand-up show.



Wow, I did not know that. Foiled by editing again.

Sadly, he's not kidding.

>> ^Boise_Lib:

"...particularly women." LOL, he should do a stand-up show.

I really enjoyed it and wanted other people to get to see it as well so I'm glad you found it!

>> ^Boise_Lib:

Cool, I missed this when it was on.
Thanks for the post, TheJehosephat.

OMG Stephen Hawking works for Anonymous! We are doomed.

Loved it. I was wondering where some of the source used in 'A Glorious Dawn' came from.

http://videosift.com/video/Carl-Sagan-Mashup-A-Glorious-Dawn-ft-Stephen-Hawking

Edit: I know this isn't the true source. Just haven't viewed the original shows yet.

Oh, okay, so you believe everything you read. That's not very intelligent, or at least it's not very SMART. The bible was written hundreds of years ago, and has since been translated and re-translated to and from dozens of different languages. Individuals and groups in power throughout different points in history have taken it upon themselves to modify the bible, adding and omitting pieces here and there to suit their agenda. They knew that gullible sheep, unable to think for themselves, are easily swayed by religion, and what better way to control a populace than by attacking their very basis for the way they live their lives?

God pre-exists everything. We know God exists because He lets us know, and He would let you know that if you sought Him out. The New Testament was written 2000 years ago. The Old Testament is at least 1000 years older than that. We have copies of the early manuscripts so we know what the original bibles looked like. So the translations today are accurate, and this idea that they are corrupt is just outright false. Yes, man has used the bible for evil ends, but this is no different from anything else man does. The very reason that Jesus Christ came to Earth is because man is so desperately wicked and needs Gods redemption.

Additionally, if one is intelligent, and they believe in ancient myths, obviously they're going to be some of the greatest minds the world has ever known, right? That's why all the geniuses of the world are devout Christians or whatever religion you want to name, right? WRONG.

NASA is not run by rocket scientists who go to church on Sunday. Great inventors and genius-level individuals such as Stephen Hawking are not religious specifically BECAUSE they are intelligent. They are able to think for themselves, not be told what to think.

Some of the greatest minds in history were devout Christians..and some of the greatest scientists:

Francis Bacon - Originated the scientific method
Johannes Kepler - Laws of Planetary motion
Galileo Galilei - Father of modern astronomy
Nicolaus Copernicus - Heliocentric Universe
James Clerk Maxwell - Electromagnetic field
Neils Bohr - the Atom
Louis Pasteur - germ theory of disease
Rene Descartes - Philosopher and mathematician
Issac Newton - Invented classical mechanics
Max Planck - Founder of quantum mechanics

A lot of modern science is built on the backs of Christian thinkers, as you can see, and that is just a short list. Today, around 10 percent of scientists believe in God. At least 50 nobel laureates believe in God. Now, if you want to talk about great thinkers, how about Albert Einstein? He believed in God. Although not a Christian, here is what he had to say about Jesus:

"To what extent are you influenced by Christianity?"
"As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene."
"Have you read Emil Ludwig’s book on Jesus?"
"Emil Ludwig’s Jesus is shallow. Jesus is too colossal for the pen of phrasemongers, however artful. No man can dispose of Christianity with a bon mot!"
"You accept the historical existence of Jesus?"
"Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."7

Of course, religion and science are completely unrelated topics, and one does not have to be non-secular in order to be a scientist, but typically, the two mindsets would conflict, as religionists base their beliefs off of emotion and other irrational concepts. Scientists use a thought process, experimentation, and ruling out possibilities in order to come to conclusions and figure out FACTS about the universe around us. There are scientists who believe in the possibility of a god, but it takes a different form than that of some all-seeing being that created everything. I'll never try to explain that to you, though, as you're too blinded by foolish nonsense that has been force-fed to you since childhood.

I will leave you with this though: Adam and Eve. Here's some fruit. I'm going to tempt you with it, and then create a snake to TALK to you and tell you you should eat some of it, and THEN I'm gunna come back and be all "OH SHIT WHAT THE FUCK?! I SMITE THEE FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!" just to fuck with humanity. Wow. You worship a pretty evil, and vindictive force. Why would you want to do that? The fucker's up there just fucking with us like a little kid with a magnifying glass over an ant hill. Jesus christ, you must really enjoy misery. I'll take the reality of humanity surviving on our own acquiescence and compassion over that bullshit any day!

I base my belief off of personal revelation. I was an agnostic my entire life and raised without religion, and I was a secular humanist and a strict materialist who didn't see any evidence for God or spirit. God woke me up to the truth and let me know He is real. If you want science facts, you only have to examine the first page of the bible:

In the beginning (TIME) God created the heavens (SPACE) and the earth (MATTER)

And God said, “Let there be light (ENERGY),” and there was light.

It took mankind 3000 years to catch up and figure out the Universes foundation is based on these principles. There is also no better description which uniquely fits the big bang theory. Creation ex-nihilio, which is creation from nothing.

The serpent you're referring to was Satan. God put the tree there because He gave mankind free will to follow His commands or not. He also warned them of the consequences if they ate of the fruit. Adam and Eve decided to disobey God and believe the lie because Satan promised them they would have Gods power if they did it. So, instead of trusting God, they lusted after His power and betrayed Him. That's why they were kicked out of the garden. Their sin brought death into the world.

No, God didn't damn us for eternity. It's the very reason God sent His son Jesus to die on the cross, to save us from this fate we created and redeem mankind. So we could have eternal life with God again in the Kingdom of Heaven. We are sinners, and the wages of sin is death. Gods gift of salvation is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Wait, let's analyze this comment...

If someone is intelligent.... They believe in a god.

And yet, god only exists BECAUSE of the LACK OF KNOWLEDGE humans possessed when they invented gods as a means of explaining that which they did not understand.

But then you could argue that that does not necessarily mean they weren't intelligent, just ignorant or uninformed.

Okay, but then let's take the typical argument from religionists when confronted about their beliefs and why they believe the way they do: "BECAUSE THE BIBLE SAYS SO!"

Oh, okay, so you believe everything you read. That's not very intelligent, or at least it's not very SMART. The bible was written hundreds of years ago, and has since been translated and re-translated to and from dozens of different languages. Individuals and groups in power throughout different points in history have taken it upon themselves to modify the bible, adding and omitting pieces here and there to suit their agenda. They knew that gullible sheep, unable to think for themselves, are easily swayed by religion, and what better way to control a populace than by attacking their very basis for the way they live their lives?

Additionally, if one is intelligent, and they believe in ancient myths, obviously they're going to be some of the greatest minds the world has ever known, right? That's why all the geniuses of the world are devout Christians or whatever religion you want to name, right? WRONG.

NASA is not run by rocket scientists who go to church on Sunday. Great inventors and genius-level individuals such as Stephen Hawking are not religious specifically BECAUSE they are intelligent. They are able to think for themselves, not be told what to think.

Of course, religion and science are completely unrelated topics, and one does not have to be non-secular in order to be a scientist, but typically, the two mindsets would conflict, as religionists base their beliefs off of emotion and other irrational concepts. Scientists use a thought process, experimentation, and ruling out possibilities in order to come to conclusions and figure out FACTS about the universe around us. There are scientists who believe in the possibility of a god, but it takes a different form than that of some all-seeing being that created everything. I'll never try to explain that to you, though, as you're too blinded by foolish nonsense that has been force-fed to you since childhood.

I will leave you with this though: Adam and Eve. Here's some fruit. I'm going to tempt you with it, and then create a snake to TALK to you and tell you you should eat some of it, and THEN I'm gunna come back and be all "OH SHIT WHAT THE FUCK?! I SMITE THEE FOR ALL ETERNITY!!!" just to fuck with humanity. Wow. You worship a pretty evil, and vindictive force. Why would you want to do that? The fucker's up there just fucking with us like a little kid with a magnifying glass over an ant hill. Jesus christ, you must really enjoy misery. I'll take the reality of humanity surviving on our own acquiescence and compassion over that bullshit any day!

But please, continue. I can do this all night!

>> ^shinyblurry:

If you were intelligent you would know there is a God..also, those who know all but lack within are utterly lacking.
>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^shinyblurry:
What are you, 13?
>> ^ForgedReality:
HAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAA

HAHA
If you don't have GOD in your life... The second someone brings fucking religion into anything as their basis for opinion, I immediately disregard them as irrelevant, brainwashed filth, and ignore everything else they have to say.
Faggots.


Why yes, yes I am. I am also sane and ten times more intelligent than you, sir. Thanks for playing!
Go read your little book of lies and get the hell off the internet.
edit - Oh, and by the way, my first comment here, the one that you just quoted was not directed at you, it was directed at the idiot bitch in the video, so kindly shut the fuck up. Thank you.



>> ^shinyblurry:

If you were intelligent you would know there is a God..also, those who know all but lack within are utterly lacking.
>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^shinyblurry:
What are you, 13?
>> ^ForgedReality:
HAHAAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAA

HAHA
If you don't have GOD in your life... The second someone brings fucking religion into anything as their basis for opinion, I immediately disregard them as irrelevant, brainwashed filth, and ignore everything else they have to say.
Faggots.


Why yes, yes I am. I am also sane and ten times more intelligent than you, sir. Thanks for playing!
Go read your little book of lies and get the hell off the internet.
edit - Oh, and by the way, my first comment here, the one that you just quoted was not directed at you, it was directed at the idiot bitch in the video, so kindly shut the fuck up. Thank you.