Stephen Hawking says universe not created by God

<< < (4/9) > >>

Mandarb (September 03, 2010, 08:42:59 AM):
There was a article in Popular Mechanics a few years back that gave me a idea what the basic idea is, and Mefiante's explanation is as succinct a explanation I've come across. Most of it is still way over my head, but also most of what I know is that M and string theory doesn't answer the questions it set out to answer.

Will have to see what is Hawking's argument.
Mandarb (September 03, 2010, 10:41:08 AM):
Interesting video
mdg (September 03, 2010, 15:30:11 PM):
A Catholic group has challenged Prof. Stephen Hawking to prove Our Lady of Gaudalupe image is a fraud and have offered him $8356.38, which is kinda weird.




Quote
By Stephen K. Ryan September 03, 2010

Today the world learned that physic's wunderkind, Stephen Hawking, has come down from the mountaintop to announce (quite dramatically) that "God did not create the universe"

Does he mean that the case is now closed? We are not sure the Catholic Church has turned the lights out just yet.

MinistryValues.com would like to suggest to Mr. Hawking that before he rushes to any conclusion about God he should check with the scientists that work for the Catholic Church on the matter. Scientist by the way with better credentials than Mr Hawkings including a Nobel Prize.

The Catholic Church, as you might expect, disagrees with Stephen Hawking on the matter of God and creation.

We would like to propose to Stephen Hawking that before he gets ahead of himself that he take care of a little business first. Like disprove the miracles of the Virgin Mary.

Guadalupe is one of the great mysteries of the world. The Catholic Church stands by the claim that "God" created the famous iconic image of the Virgin Mary. Nobel prize winning scientists have investigated the famous icon an state under no uncertain term the image of Guadalupe was not created man. Richard Kuhn, a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, has found that the image did not have natural, animal or mineral colorings. Given that there were no synthetic colorings in 1531, the image is inexplicable.

Millions of Catholics believe the famous image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously painted by God. Clearly Mr. Hawking would find this event impossible, yet the Catholic Church indeed stands by the claim that the image was the result of a miracle.

So with this in mind ministryvalues.com would like to offer Hawkings a $$8356.38 reward (its all we can come up with) if he can prove to us who painted Our Lady of Guadalupe or tell the Catholic church how it came to be. By proving the image of "Our Lady Of Guadalupe was not painted by "God" would not only improve Mr. Hawkings considerable reputation but he would enjoy the added benefit crushing the hopes and dreams of millions of believers.

The Catholic Church claims the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously imprinted by Mary on the tilma, or cloak, of St. Juan Diego in 1531. The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as the appearance on Mary’s eyes of those present in the room when the tilma was opened and the image’s lack of decay.

Just Recently on an Official State visit, Ms. Hillary Clinton asked the Monsignor of the Basilica of "Our Lady of Guadalupe" who painted the beautiful image of the Virgin Mary. The Monsignor answered "well God did!" (we know he wanted to add "you big ninny)
Wandapec (September 03, 2010, 20:30:38 PM):
A Catholic group has challenged Prof. Stephen Hawking to prove Our Lady of Gaudalupe image is a fraud
These guys just don't get it. Surely the burden of proof is on them - they're the ones making the claim?
Mefiante (September 03, 2010, 20:47:23 PM):
At the very real risk of trivialising such an obviously well thought-out piece of scholarly research ::) …

“Today the world learned that physic's wunderkind…”
No, no. That should be: “Today the world learned that physics’ wunderkind…” although “… physics wunderkind…” would be fine too.
“MinistryValues.com would like to suggest to Mr. Hawking that…”
No, no. That should be Prof. Hawking. He’s earned it. Really.
“Scientist by the way with better credentials than Mr Hawkings including a Nobel Prize.”
No, no. Not only does your facility with plurals, punctuation and sentence construction suck, this time ’round you also manage to get the man’s title and his name wrong. Really, now. That should be: “Scientists, by the way, with better credentials than Prof. Hawking, including a Nobel Prize winner” or “laureate” or “recipient” or something. The good professor’s surname has no trailing “s.” Please.
“Nobel prize winning scientists have investigated the famous icon an state under no uncertain term the image of Guadalupe was not created man.”
No, no. Hyphenation for adjectival phrases, as well as conjunctions and prepositions are equally problematic, it seems. How about: “Nobel Prize-winning scientists have investigated the famous icon and state in no uncertain terms that the image of Guadalupe was not created by man.”
“Clearly Mr. Hawking would find this event impossible…”No, no. Once again, that should be Prof. Hawking. He truly has earned it. Not a word of a lie.
“So with this in mind ministryvalues.com would like to offer Hawkings $$8,356.38 as areward…”
No, no. It’s obvious that basic linguistic rules are well beyond your grasp. Let’s try: “So with this in mind, ministryvalues.com would like to offer Hawking $8,356.38 as a reward…”
“By proving the image of "Our Lady Of Guadalupe was not painted by "God" would not only improve Mr. Hawkings considerable reputation…”
No, no. Consistent punctuation and possessives are as far beyond your capabilities as basic respect for earned titles and correct names are, aren’t they? How about: “Proving that the image of "Our Lady Of Guadalupe" was not painted by "God" would not only improve Prof. Hawking’s considerable reputation…”
“The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as…”
No, no. Wait… Actually, this is almost okay although it would be much less awkward as: “The image has numerous inexplicable features, such as…”
“Just Recently on an Official State visit, Ms. Hillary Clinton asked…”
No, no. Capitalisation is also somewhat troublesome. More correctly, it should read: “Just recently on an official state visit, Ms. Hillary Clinton asked…”
Some things are just so stupid that the only sane reaction is ridicule and mockery.

'Luthon64

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page