Stephen Hawking: God didn't create universe

[Amnesiac]

LONDON, England (CNN) -- God did not create the universe, world-famous physicist Stephen Hawking argues in a new book that aims to banish a divine creator from physics.
Hawking says in his book "The Grand Design" that, given the existence of gravity, "the universe can and will create itself from nothing," according to an excerpt published Thursday in The Times of London.
"Spontaneous creation is the reason why there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist," he writes in the excerpt.
"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper [fuse] and set the universe going," he writes.

...

It was the discovery of other solar systems outside our own, in 1992, that undercut a key idea of Newton's -- that our world was so uniquely designed to be comfortable for human life that some divine creator must have been responsible.
But, Hawking argues, if there are untold numbers of planets in the galaxy, it's less remarkable that there's one with conditions for human life.

From here. (http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/09/02/hawking.god.universe/)

Thoughts?

[DarkHorses]

I disagree, but he's allowed his opinion. It's just one of the many possibilities. There may be a God, and there may not be. I believe there is a God, but scientists like him do deserve credit for exploring the way things happened and trying to get to the bottom of everything.

[deadpie]

My current thoughts are this is going to be flying to Ramblings Of The Wise soon.

And Stephen Hawking isn't talking about just the Christian God before you guys start off that. In the report, you'll read -

""The 'god' that Stephen Hawking is trying to debunk is not the creator God of the Abrahamic faiths who really is the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing," said Denis Alexander.
"Hawking's god is a god-of-the-gaps used to plug present gaps in our scientific knowledge."

Just setting this out before the debate begins soon, because it will.

[Sith Lord 13]

It's bad science to say it disproves God. Based on what Tim says though, it's quite fine. And religion will reexplain it in the new light. It used to be God created the earth. Then he created the big bang. Now it'll be that he wrote the laws of the universe such that the spontaneous generation came about.

[BOBBY HILL]

who cares i`ll figure out if gods real when I die

[Magus]

Stephen Hawking, and his god-of-the-gaps. I still wonder about his religious and metaphysical views on God and what not.

[Giles]

I'm not religious in the slightest, personally I don't think that there is a God nor that he created the earth, the universe or the big bang.

Science can prove what happened seconds after the big bang, undeniable evidence with the likes of red/blue shift being the most simple. One of the only things that science cannot prove about the creation of the universe, earth and evolution is why/how the big bang actually happened.

That's why Hawking shouldn't of came out and said that God didn't create/cause it because there is no evidence.

[Perseus]

Why is this news?

[Sage]

That's why Hawking shouldn't of came out and said that God didn't create/cause it because there is no evidence.

No, he's perfectly right to say that. You can't prove a negative and no evidence points to there being a god so it's irrational to believe in one.

[Giles]

No, he's perfectly right to say that. You can't prove a negative and no evidence points to there being a god so it's irrational to believe in one.

True. The big bang is literally the only thing that religion holds to science not being able to explain and prove. I don't think it was a good idea for him to come out and say it without any new evidence.

[Underground_Network]

He's Stephen Hawking. He is God. Therefore if there is no God, Stephen Hawking does not exist. Thus we reach an endless conundrum that will never be solved.

But yeah, in this case, it's impossible to say who's write and who's wrong. I love Stephen Hawking and admire his intellectual capacity and his desire to learn any and everything and I'm not a big fan of the concept of God, but I do agree that there is no winning this argument without solid proof about what caused the big bang and what "existed" before that, something which we likely will never possess.

[Sage]

there is no winning this argument without solid proof about what caused the big bang and what "existed" before that, something which we likely will never possess.

Go look into M Theory (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-yEu-b_YD0). We've already some good ideas as to what could've happened before the big bang and what causes it.

[Contra]

Someone with brains and balls.

[Magus]

Go look into M Theory (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-yEu-b_YD0). We've already some good ideas as to what could've happened before the big bang and what causes it.

Oh no! Not that skating Japanese guy again!
No. Maybe I need to watch it again.
:blowup:

No, he's perfectly right to say that. You can't prove a negative and no evidence points to there being a god so it's irrational to believe in one.

That's argument from ignorance, there.(or so I think)
And
Somewhere, in the vast reaches of the cyberspace, there is a pd file that claims that you can actually prove a negative. (http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articlepdf/proveanegative.pdf)
========
Also, I suggest the people to read this tiny wiki article: Click me! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenisis) - also, another printable version wiki article: Click me! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_theory)

[Sage]

That's argument from ignorance, there.(or so I think)
And
Somewhere, in the vast reaches of the cyberspace, there is a pd file that claims that you can actually prove a negative. (http://departments.bloomu.edu/philosophy/pages/content/hales/articlepdf/proveanegative.pdf)
Semantics.

[Magus]

Semantics.

Semantics? What do you mean by that? We acquire knowledge, not born with them, you know.

[Perseus]

ZuYEd_iQHN4&feature=sub
Lol @ the comments on Stephen's quote thing mabob on where ever it was posted and such.

[Amnesiac]

Why is this news?

Because of America's obsession with everything remotely religious, and all the butthurt that occurs when one person says something in a book.

[wyatt]

Ok can someone please help be get this, and im athiest btw.
"It used to be God created the earth. Then he created the big bang."
if there was NOTHING before the big bang, how was there god, why would there have been god, and how does anyone know about what the heck he did. i say science explains a lot, not god. but let me say this: If there is/was a god, he's one HELL of a mathematician!!

[Commander Thor]

Ok can someone please help be get this, and im athiest btw.
"It used to be God created the earth. Then he created the big bang."
if there was NOTHING before the big bang, how was there god, why would there have been god, and how does anyone know about what the heck he did. i say science explains a lot, not god. but let me say this: If there is/was a god, he's one HELL of a mathematician!!

No one has ever said that there was nothing before the big bang, don't know where you pulled that from.

[Continuum]

Ok can someone please help be get this, and im athiest btw.
"It used to be God created the earth. Then he created the big bang."
if there was NOTHING before the big bang, how was there god, why would there have been god, and how does anyone know about what the heck he did. i say science explains a lot, not god. but let me say this: If there is/was a god, he's one HELL of a mathematician!!

Science may have proofs that God does not exists or God is just too irrational and redundant to believe in. But believe me, the explanations today are still insufficient to denounce God. No one still cannot tell whether someone or something existed before, and why we exist in the first place. Time will tell, so let's wait and see.

This topic is soon going to spark another debate about God :P

[Azunite]

I believe him, everything we cannot find how it happened we threw it on some sole divine. Hawking has a point

[embers]

Ok can someone please help be get this, and im athiest btw.
"It used to be God created the earth. Then he created the big bang."
if there was NOTHING before the big bang, how was there god, why would there have been god, and how does anyone know about what the heck he did. i say science explains a lot, not god. but let me say this: If there is/was a god, he's one HELL of a mathematician!!

Because God, in theory, exists outside of the universe - he isn't restricted by its laws. There's also a theory somewhere that he exists outside of time, and I read this pretty good description of that somewhere: it goes along the lines of, "If you're walking straight on a path, you can't see what's over the horizon in front of or behind you. But if you look down on it from above you can see every bit of it." - and that's where God apparently stands, and why he can exist outside of the universe and outside of time (hence being able to see everything at once etc).

I don't believe in God, but I like looking up the theories behind his existence. I once found a website that explained the theory of God and Time being the same thing, but I can't find it anymore ):

[Magus]

Because God, in theory, exists outside of the universe - he isn't restricted by its laws. There's also a theory somewhere that he exists outside of time, and I read this pretty good description of that somewhere: it goes along the lines of, "If you're walking straight on a path, you can't see what's over the horizon in front of or behind you. But if you look down on it from above you can see every bit of it." - and that's where God apparently stands, and why he can exist outside of the universe and outside of time (hence being able to see everything at once etc).
Outside of universe that means he doesn't exist in our realm. He exist out of time, that merely means he is not engaged where time is, this means, he doesn't exist, yet again.

What you have said defies the laws of visual perspective (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_(visual)).
I don't believe in God, but I like looking up the theories behind his existence. I once found a website that explained the theory of God and Time being the same thing, but I can't find it anymore ):That's a pantheist philosophy. Many other philosophy says that god is our conscious, god is the universe, god is the time... etc.

[embers]

Outside of universe that means he doesn't exist in our realm. He exist out of time, that merely means he is not engaged where time is, this means, he doesn't exist, yet again.

What you have said defies the laws of visual perspective (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspective_(visual)).

He exists out of our realm and out of time =/= he doesn't exist.

Because even if he doesn't exist in our realm, our time, our universe, he is still the reason our universe exists (our creator), so by affecting the way/reason we live he does exist... does that make any sense? xD

Oh, and I'm not familiar with the laws of visual perspective :L I'll do some reading after dinner.

[Sith Lord 13]

Outside of universe that means he doesn't exist in our realm. He exist out of time, that merely means he is not engaged where time is, this means, he doesn't exist, yet again.

No, it just means you have to view time as a dimension, just like the other 3 observable ones. He doesn't exist outside of time, he exists outside LINEAR time. He can see and move between points in time as we can see and move about a room.

[Dunce]

How come when he says it, it makes the news?
...Why?

[Amnesiac]

How come when he says it, it makes the news?
...Why?

Because Hawking is one of the world's most (if not the most) revered scientists.

I don't see why people are surprised about this, though. While saying God didn't create the universe "because gravity exists" seems like a stupid reason to the ordinary sheep-citizen, it's a reasonable explanation once you read A Brief History of Time.

[Sith Lord 13]

Because Hawking is one of the world's most (if not the most) revered scientists.

I don't see why people are surprised about this, though. While saying God didn't create the universe "because gravity exists" seems like a stupid reason to the ordinary sheep-citizen, it's a reasonable explanation once you read A Brief History of Time.

But you can't deny Hawking isn't saying it for effect. The man's one of my favorite scientists, but, as seen with the Christian acceptance of the Big Bang Theory (I'm sticking to the non-fundamental non-nutjobs), all this means is that we go one step further back. Instead of god creating the tiny point pass which created the big bang, he created the laws of gravity which caused the big bang. God is seen as the prime mover, the answer at the level at which science can only say "It just is".

I don't see a way to disprove God, nor do I think one can be found. That's why I'm sticking to agnosticism.

[AJC410]

He has his right to an opinion.

[Magus]

He has his right to an opinion.It wasn't an opinion, it is an axiom.

[Commander Thor]

He has his right to an opinion.

Did this really need a 4 month bump?
:locked: