Hawking Dismisses God
Professor Stephen Hawking has dismissed entirely the notion that a God had any hand whatsoever in the creation of the universe:
In the new work, The Grand Design, Professor Stephen Hawking argues that the Big Bang, rather than occurring following the intervention of a divine being, was inevitable due to the law of gravity.
In his 1988 book, A Brief History of Time, Hawking had seemed to accept the role of God in the creation of the universe. But in the new text, co-written with American physicist Leonard Mlodinow, he said new theories showed a creator is “not necessary”.
The Grand Design, an extract of which appears in the Times today, sets out to contest Sir Isaac Newton’s belief that the universe must have been designed by God as it could not have been created out of chaos.
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,” he writes. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
“It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”
Poor poor creationists. They spend all their time bitching, moaning and whinging about the impossibility of the universe creating itself without a sentient, guiding hand (whilst ignoring where that came from), but Prof Hawking has undermined them quite comprehensively. There’s just no need for a God to explain anything in existence at all. I wonder how many imaginative ways the creationist lobby can a) dismiss his argument without addressing it b) invoke a theist, straw man argument to try to shift the burden of proof away from them yet again and c) lie about science until they’re blue in the face in the hope most people will believe them and not Hawking.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
I think the onus is on you to prove you can create something from nothing. That is a laughable proposition, certainly no more believable than your position against the existence of supernatural power.
Ergo, Hawking has retreated to unprovable assertions and demonstrating the arrogance of science in overreaching, as usual, into the metaphysical.
If Hawking is right and so damn smart, lets see him draw a theory of himself and a string relationship of how he came to sentience and construing meaning from the Universe.
So arrogant.
I think it’s breathtakingly hubristic for a theist to label any scientist as ‘arrogant’ for undermining in any way at all their claims of a supernatural sky buddy. The onus is hardly on me to prove anything, when there has never been any evidence to back up any claims of the existence of deities, miracles, you name it.
A scientist ‘can’t prove it’ yet theists and their mindbogglingly outrageous claims get a free ride from having to do just that? Outrageous.
Mugwa
Actually… there’s a wealth of scientific information and observation available – including our very own ability to reason – which brings most of us to the conclusion that God doesn’t exist outside of peoples minds.
Theists on the other hand don’t think their faith is questionable at all because ‘it just is’, according to them. I therefore find your comments above staggeringly arrogant – especially bearing in mind someone seemingly so interested in how we got here seems to have bypassed all the great work these scientists have been doing.