Stephen Hawkins Says Idea of Afterlife a "fairy tale"

I'm not really making an argument. I'm just trying to point out that you are objecting to someone calling a belief which is indistinguishable from a fairy tale... a fairy tale. Just as long as we are clear on that, I'm happy.

 

What happened next was that science advanced, revised its knowledge base, and progressed. You cannot say the same of religion, and Christianity is still couched in a touchingly naive, mediaeval faith in virgin births, impregnation by ghosts, resurrection from death and assorted 'miraculous' events.

 

He is VERY limited because he refuses to accept that there are things out there science cannot understand.

 

What back up do you have for his opinion? Everyone agrees that science today cannot prove the existence of an afterlife, and that is all he can say. I don't see anything of value in what he says.

 

Why the insults? That 'slovenly, sloppy crippled bastard' that you so blithely disparage, has contributed more to science and the world in his long, crippled, speechless life than you could possibly imagine.

 

False. please show where he has made such a claim.

 

It is a fact that regurgitating what you read in a book has no relation to ones intelligence!!!

 

Stupid post, but predictably so. Scientists become knowledgeable through study, experimentation etc. They might not understand something today but tomorrow they will. That is how science, and the acquisition of knowledge, works.

 

If there's no evidence for it's existence, then by far the most likely explanation for why people think there's an afterlife is because someone made it the hell up.

 

For a man who understands the need for the existence of multiple other essentially non-observable dimensions to best explain certain concepts of particle physics, should the possibility of the existence of consciousness after death be so difficult to accept?

 

For a man who understands the need for the existence of multiple other essentially non-observable dimensions to best explain certain concepts of particle physics, should the possibility of the existence of fairies be so difficult to accept?

 

You're right, Snake... and that's exactly why I said, and say again: Mr Hawking should refrain from making his learned pronouncements about things he simply does not know anything about!

You say, "Scientists become knowledgeable through study, experimentation etc. They might not understand something today but tomorrow they will. That is how science, and the acquisition of knowledge, works." Great!

After Mr Hawking has become knowledgeable through study, the employment of the Scientific Method, et al., I'd love to read his findings concerning the non-existence of God. After Mr Hawking has conducted his requisite research, I'd love to read his White Paper disproving an afterlife. But until then, Snake, Hawking's learned observations have no more validity than you or me holding forth about such topics after ordering our third pint of Porter at a neighborhood pub.

The man knows much about what he knows about, and for the rest? It is as unsupported and as meaningless as a bar fart....

 

Research into what, exactly? The only research material he has to work with is one ancient book. That's it.

 

Exactly, or even far worse things than fairies?

 

That "crippled bastard" chooses to slap religious folk in the face with his outrageous and arrogant claims. So I choose to slap him back in the face with those same "facts" that he so cherishes. The fact remains that he knows nothing about the afterlife, yet we all know that he is a feeb.

 

Neither do you, neither does anyone else.

 

Funny that you believe in ghosts. Hey wanna buy a rock that gives you good health until 100? 100 000 $ you only have to believe in it.

 

Petty insults, typical.

You have no facts. All you have is beliefs . Beliefs based on ancient writings and fary tales that have been changed and modified for centurys.

 

With some due respect; the 'lack of evidence' is evidence that there is no afterlife.

As a scientist, Hawking has authority to discover evidence, and to test and retest that evidence, obtaining the same answer each time, in order to establish something. I suspect Hawking has not found any evidence for an afterlife...therefore his comments...

 

But Hawking's evidence is the 'lack of evidence' about an afterlife. Just because something is 'vast and complex' does not require a creator. We only know what we know today, and we will learn more tomorrow, but because some things are beyond our current understanding or technological reach, this just means we need more time for discovery...not to just give up and declare everything we don't understand must have been created by some deity...

 

Hawking fully accepts there are things we don't yet understand! Righteousness is something we find in religion, or politics, or special interests...not in science.

If religion is so all-knowing, then please explain the physical process in which the Universe was created??

 

The imagination of ignorant, fearful savages!!!

 

What do you know about this so-called 'afterlife'? I suspect the answer is 'nothing'. And why so sensitive? If you have a valid response to him, along with all the pertinent facts, then I'm sure you'll share it with us.

 

Every one's IQ lowers about 50 points when discussing religion...and for some people...this makes it difficult for them to maintain breathing...

 

I didn't think I'd get anything approaching a coherent response...