Lawrence Krauss is Foundation Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration and the Physics Department, and Director of the Origins Initiative at Arizona State University.
So, I watched the entire video and enjoyed it. I just wonder why Christianity is mocked so often in society. No one stands up for religious tolerance when it involves Jesus. Mock or make fun of Mohammed in this country and the ACLU and everyone else would be on top of you. I think EVERYONE's beliefs should be respected.
Somebodies watching over you HG . Its like sticking your ear up to a whole in the bathroom stall, only to be shocked to see its glory when somebody whispers factual science into a creationists ear.
"Even when I'm riding dirty, I'm riding clean." --Joseph
Originally posted by Samb: Somebodies watching over you HG . Its like sticking your ear up to a whole in the bathroom stall, only to be shocked to see its glory when somebody whispers factual science into a creationists ear.
I don't know about his ear but i will bet his mouth has been on many a glory hole.
"Clowns to the left of me jokers to the right here i am stuck in the middle with you" -Steelers Wheel
Originally posted by Samb: Somebodies watching over you HG . Its like sticking your ear up to a whole in the bathroom stall, only to be shocked to see its glory when somebody whispers factual science into a creationists ear.
I'm by no means a Christian, but I find the term "factual science" to be thrown around far too often and with far too much credibilty. In studying biology, physics, et al, I've come to realize that science relies almost as much on faith as religion does.
Originally posted by Samb: Somebodies watching over you HG . Its like sticking your ear up to a whole in the bathroom stall, only to be shocked to see its glory when somebody whispers factual science into a creationists ear.
I'm by no means a Christian, but I find the term "factual science" to be thrown around far too often and with far too much credibilty. In studying biology, physics, et al, I've come to realize that science relies almost as much on faith as religion does.
Well, I know that, and I'm not a scientist. Which of course, proves that I don't know what I'm talking about.
What are you doing? "Pulling our legs"? How dare you speak the truth! Science is full of faith.
Or are you just messin' with the masses?
________________________________________________ -The most under appreciated artist, is the one who did not create. -The most under appreciated painter, is the one who never painted. -The most under appreciated writer, is the one that never wrote. -The most under appreciated, is the one who never did.
Anyhow...I thought this was more interesting than the Darwin look-a-like. But I did notice, like a blaring siren...how many times the educated man said "theory", or "we just don't know" or implied "they" were wrong in the past but "we" know now(I think "they" thought they knew too).
I bailed after 20 min. this time. I'll go back and watch the rest some other time.
I prefer the physicist approach more than the philosophical approach.
________________________________________________ -The most under appreciated artist, is the one who did not create. -The most under appreciated painter, is the one who never painted. -The most under appreciated writer, is the one that never wrote. -The most under appreciated, is the one who never did.
Finished it at last. I must say that it is thought provoking. Yet I see so many holes in the hypothesis presented.
I can't possibly delve into all of them. I'm not interested in writing a dissertation, thank you very much.
First and foremost, one must recognize that the speaker himself said countless times that physicists don't know...X,Y, or Z. To me, this shows a huge amount of humility on his part.
He was obviously an atheist and this showed through his commentary. That's his prerogative.
If a scientist such as this admits to so many unknowns and so many non-absolutes how then can the lay people believe the "conclusions" as fact?
The answer: because they are "sheeple". We all want to believe in absolutes. We all want to believe that what we believe is true.
The faith necessary to believe in "Science" is no more poignantly displayed then in this video. He says so.
He discussed the idea at the end of the video of ["The morals of Infinity" where it must be acknowledged that "we really don't know"]
Same goes for evolution, carbon dating, speed of light, conception, the Earths Core, dark matter, how a cell regenerates and on and on and on.....
A Universe from Nothing is difficult to explain from out little place in the middle of nothing surrounded by so much, by people who try so desperately to explain away a great big GOD.
But a Great Big God said " Let there be Light and there was light". etc...
Something from nothing thus began....the incomprehensible morals of infinity.
________________________________________________ -The most under appreciated artist, is the one who did not create. -The most under appreciated painter, is the one who never painted. -The most under appreciated writer, is the one that never wrote. -The most under appreciated, is the one who never did.
A lot of your statement is untrue. I’m not saying that you’re lying. It’s simply false. We have a very good understanding of evolution, there is no serious debate as to its existence. There is debate around the details. Just as nobody is debating whether gravity exists, we also don’t yet know all the details. We don’t believe anymore that it’s God keeping everything down. We don’t “believe” in the speed of light, we know the speed of light in a vacuum and otherwise. There is similar understanding, to varying degrees, around conception, the earth’s core, dark matter, cells etc. Whether or not these fall outside of yours or my understanding is another matter. They are no less understood.
“A Universe from Nothing is difficult to explain from out little place in the middle of nothing surrounded by so much”.
I thought he explained it in the video very simply. I would re-word your statement, “A Universe from nothing is difficult to explain to somebody who is afraid of certain sciences because they think they might challenge their belief in God”
If you believe in a “God of Gaps” that is, the kind of God who is called upon to explain away gaps in our understanding, then you are right to be worried. That God is dying a little every day.
I’m not a big fan of Dawkins’ approach. While entertaining, he is acting as science’s pitbull and that will always alienate some people. Science should steer clear of religion and, in order to increase our understanding, believers in God will have to accept that while science will continue to diminish the “gaps”, as believers for hundreds of years have accepted science’s understanding of sun-rises, tides, fire, lightning, flight, gravity etc., this reality does not have to diminish God.
Here’s a man, Fr George Coyne, for whom I have a lot of respect, holding his own well against Dawkins. It’s quite long but refreshing to hear how he reconciles his belief in God with his knowledge of science.
Originally posted by AnRyan: A lot of your statement is untrue. I’m not saying that you’re lying. It’s simply false. We have a very good understanding of evolution, there is no serious debate as to its existence. There is debate around the details. Just as nobody is debating whether gravity exists, we also don’t yet know all the details. We don’t believe anymore that it’s God keeping everything down. We don’t “believe” in the speed of light, we know the speed of light in a vacuum and otherwise. There is similar understanding, to varying degrees, around conception, the earth’s core, dark matter, cells etc. Whether or not these fall outside of yours or my understanding is another matter. They are no less understood.
“A Universe from Nothing is difficult to explain from out little place in the middle of nothing surrounded by so much”.
I thought he explained it in the video very simply. I would re-word your statement, “A Universe from nothing is difficult to explain to somebody who is afraid of certain sciences because they think they might challenge their belief in God”
If you believe in a “God of Gaps” that is, the kind of God who is called upon to explain away gaps in our understanding, then you are right to be worried. That God is dying a little every day.
I’m not a big fan of Dawkins’ approach. While entertaining, he is acting as science’s pitbull and that will always alienate some people. Science should steer clear of religion and, in order to increase our understanding, believers in God will have to accept that while science will continue to diminish the “gaps”, as believers for hundreds of years have accepted science’s understanding of sun-rises, tides, fire, lightning, flight, gravity etc., this reality does not have to diminish God.
Here’s a man, Fr George Coyne, for whom I have a lot of respect, holding his own well against Dawkins. It’s quite long but refreshing to hear how he reconciles his belief in God with his knowledge of science.
This is a great discussion. And an important one. I believe in god, but i am an engineer and scientist. I have always wondered why people of great faith had a difficult time accepting what science has to offer. I have NEVER had a problem reconciling the two.
Why the universe is here is a question that no science will ever answer. But science is definately answering the questions of how it happened and how the universe and nature work. If you are a believer of any religion this is nothing more than science helping the world understand the true nature and beauty of God's creation.
Sooooo if you believe God is the reason behind all that is here, i find it odd that religion does not thank science everyday for reveling every aspect of god's amazing handy work. lol i mean what is the greater miracle??? that God planted us here like flowers in a week? or that he simply set into motion the amazingly beautiful and complex universe that we all live in? Quite frankly i am at a loss to understand why the church doesn't make Darwin a saint. God spoke to Darwin and other scientists . . and gave them the vision and clarity to understand the true nature of what God set into motion. How can this be bad?
the idea that God is sitting around micro-managing the earth is kinda goofy. If he is as powerful as believers believe then why wouldn't he just come up with an amazing system that would just run on it's own? I believe he did . . and we have yet to discover all of the wonders in the universe. . but we will understand them because God (through eveolution) gave us an advanced brain and free will to use it.
Texas misses the point. the beauty of Gods universe is not in some simple magic trick, it's way way more complex and wonderful than that. And AR is totally right in his assessment, we have a very good understanding of our world, where it came from and how it works. Like allot of people that didn't pay attention in science class, Texas believes that calling something a "theory" makes it an unifomed guess. The goofy Intelligent Design people (i think they have an office down the hall from the Flat Earth Society) like to hang their hat on that. "Evolution is ONLY a Theory!" they like to say, and then they make up some BS that cannot be tested and want it to have equal time.
Nothing is further from the truth. A scientific theory, especially one that has been tested and verified as much and in as many ways as eveolution, is about as close to complete understanding as it gets.
To all people of great faith all i can say is open your eyes . . embrace science and see the true nature and beauty of Gods work.
A Seasoned Witch Could Call You From The Depths of Your Disgrace And Rearrange your Liver to The Solid Mental Grace
Posts: 100 | Location: Jersey, What Exit? | Registered: September 14, 2009
. Its like sticking your ear up to a whole in the bathroom stall, only to be shocked to see its glory when somebody whispers factual science into a creationists ear.
