The Results Are In: Hawking Dumb, Theologians Smart

Dr. Stephen Hawking, arguably one of the smartest  human beings, alive or dead, declared on September 2nd, that god did not create the universe and the “Big Bang” was an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics.  His soon-to-be-released book, “The Grand Design” (co-authored with U.S. physicist Leonard Mlodinow), Hawking stated that there exist a new series of theories that make a creator god redundant.  By combining Albert Einstein’s Relativity Theory and Quantum Theory, Dr. Hawking states that the laws of physics mean it is simply not necessary to believe that God had intervened in the Big Bang.  

Hawking writes, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist”

Then the “Religious Leaders” struck back. And this is where the sensibility stopped for many of the collective mass of some two-billion deluded citizens of the human race, who blindly follow and readily agree with the consensus of theologians.  Ah, Theologians…  Theologians are a joke in the world of academia.  We’re talking about people who have spent a sizeable chunk of their lives in the serious, educational pursuit to understand the inner workings of one of the oldest existing fairy tales.  Many Theologians have “doctorates” and are widely believed to be the experts of everything godly.   However, In my opinion, theologians are about as relevent as someone who has spent fifteen years in post-graduate education to understand the complexities of the Tooth Fairy.  And they should be taken as seriously.  When your education consists of several years to learn how to work through personal doubts and then how to apologize for an enigmatic belief in a comsic Jewish zombie and his contradictory, error-packed and scientifically preposterous holy book, you should seriously consider going into another line of work.    When your education consists of forced acceptance of scientific models that defy logic, reason and common sense, you should seriously consider going into another line of work.  When your education consists of a belief that an invisible man in the sky “spoke into existence” the entire universe, along with the ignorance to the proven scientific facts surrounding cosmology, your opinion on Dr. Hawking and his life’s work rates about as high as my compassion for the mosquito that flew into the path of my truck.

When will the believers of the world realize that they are totally, completely and unequivocally wasting their time?  Their beliefs about cosmology, astronomy, archaeology, paleontology, biology, sociology and just about every other “ology” out there (except theology, of course) are not only no longer relevent, but resemble the final throes of a child’s tantrum when they realize that the only way to get attention after being petulent is to throw themselves to the ground and make a lot of noise that makes no sense at all, but only serves to annoy the living shit out of their parents.

Here’s a typical list of what topics are taught to a student of Theology, and keep in mind these topics are infected with reigious indoctrination and ride on a hovercraft of supersition:

  • Old Testament Survey
  • Ancient Near Eastern Languages and Literature
  • New Testament Survey
  • History of Christianity
  • Systematic Theology
  • Philosophical and Moral Theology
  • Pastoral Care
  • Pastoral Leadership
  • Preaching
  • Worship
  • Evangelism
  • Educational Ministry

Now, here are a list of what Dr. Hawking had to learn to gain his doctorates in Theoretical Physics and Cosmology, not counting, of course, everything else he has learned, discovered or produced since gaining his doctorates:

  • Black hole thermodynamics
  • Classical mechanics
  • Condensed matter physics
  • Conservation of energy
  • Dynamics
  • Electromagnetism
  • Field theory
  • Fluid dynamics
  • General relativity
  • Molecular modeling
  • Particle physics
  • Physical cosmology
  • Quantum chromodynamics
  • Quantum computers
  • Quantum electrochemistry
  • Quantum electrodynamics
  • Quantum field theory
  • Quantum information theory
  • Quantum mechanics
  • Solid mechanics
  • Solid state physics or Condensed Matter Physics and the electronic structure of materials
  • Special relativity
  • Standard Model
  • Statistical mechanics
  • Thermodynamics
  • Causal Sets
  • Dark energy or Einstein’s Cosmological Constant
  • Einstein-Rosen Bridge
  • Emergence
  • Grand unification theory
  • Loop quantum gravity
  • M-theory
  • String theory
  • Supersymmetry
  • Theory of everything
  • Dynamic theory of gravity
  • Grand unification theory
  • Luminiferous aether
  • Scalar field theory
  • Orgone
  • Biefeld Brown ElectrogravityHistory of the Universe 
  • Equations of motion
  • Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker metric
  • General relativity
  • Positive cosmological constant
  • Gravitation
  • Radiation and matter content of the universe.
  • Particle physics in cosmology
  • Scattering processes and decay of unstable particles
  • Timeline of the Big Bang
  • Stars, quasars, galaxies, clusters of galaxies and superclusters
  • The cosmological principle
  • Magnetic monopoles
  • Quantum field theory
  • Brane cosmology
  • Antiparticles
  • X-rays and gamma rays
  • The baryon asymmetry and baryogenesis.
  • CP-symmetry
  • Nucleosynthesis
  • The equivalence principle
  • Neutrino physics. 
  • Cosmic microwaves
  • Decoupling and Recombination
  • Thomson scattering
  • The thermal black-body spectrum.
  • Cosmological perturbation theory
  • COBE and WMAP
  • Degree Angular Scale Interferometrics
  • Cosmic Background Imaging
  • The Lambda-CDM model
  • The Sunyaev-Zel’dovich
  • The Sachs-Wolfe effect
  • Formation and evolution of large-scale structure
  • Structure formation
  • Galaxy formation and evolution
  • The Sloan Digital Sky Survey
  • The 2dF Galaxy Redshift Survey
  • The Lyman alpha forest
  • Dark matter
  • Big Bang nucleosynthesis
  • Dark energy
  • Quantum field theory
  • The anthropic principle

So, there you have it, brothers and sisters.  And people wonder why I laugh in the faces of Theologians and their “explanations“.  Seriously, it boggles the mind as to why anyone in this day and age, with the huge repository of the collective scientific knowledge in existence, would continue to believe in ancient supersitions for any other reason outside of the combination of willful ignorance, spiritual arrogance and a delusional grasp on reality.  When the rubber meets the road, I’ll go with Dr. Hawking and those who have also devoted their lives to the pursuit of real, empirical knowledge and not the adherance to children’s bedtime stories.

Here’s a little graphic that I created, for your posting pleasure.  I claim it as Royalty Free, so have fun sharing it with whoever you want to:

  48 comments for “The Results Are In: Hawking Dumb, Theologians Smart

  1. September 5, 2010 at 6:59 am

    and the Theologian says,”I don’t understand much of Hawkings educational list so it must not be relevant and that “Luminiferous aether” sound s a lot like “Lucifer;” besides, nowhere did he study Jesus so how could he possibly speak to creation in the Christian view… anyway man, all you need is Jesus.”

    And that’s when my head exploded…

  2. September 5, 2010 at 9:59 am

    That’s precisely why Stephen Hawking and not Stephen King or Martin Luther King are physicists.

    By the way, F.Y.I. big bangs are happening all the time, in our universe and others.

    The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is the world’s largest and highest-energy particle accelerator
    It is expected that it will address the most fundamental questions of physics (i.e. Higg’s Boson et. al.)

    We should discuss parallel dimensions, multiple universes, and membranes.

    From your list of scientific achievements you may want to correct this point about Hawking.

    Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking put forward a radically-revised version of his theory on the nature of black holes, which formed where stars collapse.
    He told a physics conference that black holes did not destroy everything they consumed but instead eventually fired out “mangled” matter and energy.

    Until now, he had argued that matter sucked into the gravitational vortex of a black hole was completely destroyed and no information about it ever reappeared apart from a generic form of radiation, now called “Hawking radiation.”

    That conflicted with an elemental law of quantum physics, which holds that information can never be completely lost.
    But in Wednesday’s presentation, entitled “The Information Paradox for black holes,” Hawking posited that black holes hold their contents for eons. He said the black holes eventually deteriorate and die.

    As they disintegrate, he said, the black holes emit their transformed contents back into the universe.

    His new theory has wide-ranging intellectual implications for other fields of study.

    Previously, Hawking had also held out the possibility that disappearing matter could travel through the black hole into a parallel universe, a concept much beloved in some branches of philosophy and in science fiction.

    “There is no baby universe branching off, as I once thought.

    The information remains firmly in our universe…,” he said.

    “I’m sorry to disappoint science fiction fans, but if information is preserved, there is no possibility of using black holes to travel to other universes,” Hawking explained in his speech.

    “If you jump into a black hole, your mass energy will be returned to our universe, but in a mangled form, which contains the information about what you were like, but in an unrecognizable state,” he argued.

    Hawking, Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University, achieved international fame with the 1975 theory that pioneered black hole science and was later popularized in his book A Brief History of Time.

    The 62-year old scientist who travels to speaking engagements around the world has had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis since his mid-20s.

    He communicates by using a hand-held device to select words on his wheelchair’s computer screen, then sends them out through a speech synthesizer.

    Hawking also settled another matter almost three decades old. He had made a bet with Caltech astrophysicist John Preskill, who insisted in 1975 that matter consumed by black holes couldn’t be destroyed.

    Hawking conceded he had lost the bet and presented Preskill with a reference work, Total Baseball, The Ultimate Baseball Encyclopedia, after having it specially flown over from the United States.

    He said he could not convince Preskill of the “superiority of cricket.”

  3. September 5, 2010 at 1:42 pm

    Hey all, don’t be so harsh. Everyone has their own beliefs. No need to put down those with differing views. We get it – some don’t agree with others so let it be. Move on.
    I can understand why Hawking doesn’t believe in a personal God that interferes with our personal lives. I wouldn’t either if I had his problems.
    I have a real problem believing nothing creates things. eg. even laws like gravity. Also, I doubt if we can even comprehend reasoning.
    Let’s all go on perusing our positions without putting down others.
    It boils down to this: how did law of gravity start? From nothing I doubt it???? If you understand nothing.

    • August 9, 2011 at 2:35 am

      Why do those whose beliefs are factual claims have to simply, respect and move on from the wrong beliefs of others? yes, we all have the right to believe what we want, but when you start going door to door telling people “this IS how is is” someone has to intervene and say “shut up! you have no proof! Stop feeding these simple minded, uneducated, gullible people shit they’re just gonna believe because you told them that’s how it is?” NO MORE! It’s 2011 and we’ve proved more than enough truths to make common sense judgements instead of looking for a “higher power” for answers. Are we still not that mentally developed to handle such a task?!?!

    • August 9, 2011 at 2:38 am

      How the hell does him having to wear glasses mean that his work showing that there is no need for a god to create the universe is invalid? Sinker, tell me do you have a job as a communicator head on a public tv broadcaster in the US? Or is there a miscommunication?

      If you have a problem believing, how much effort have you spent trying to remedy that problem, or is the right hand picture above a portrait?

    • Slarti
      August 9, 2011 at 3:42 am

      Argh… this brain dead point again… listen to yourself!!!

      “From nothing, I doubt it!!”
      From WHERE did your “god” come from? Can’t you see that your “explaination” doesn’t in any way answer the question you self asked? We can of course argue that perhaps a super-god created all the existing gods, and a super-super-god created the super-god… but it will NEVER answer ANYTHING! Rid yourself of this obvious shit and try to accept and understand the world we are living in. You will in the end feel MUCH BETTER (I promise).

  4. September 5, 2010 at 2:05 pm

    In “The Grand Design” Stephen Hawking postulates that the M-theory may be the Holy Grail of physics…the Grand Unified Theory which Einstein had tried to formulate and later abandoned. It expands on quantum mechanics and string theories.

    In my e-book on comparative mysticism is a quote by Albert Einstein: “…most beautiful and profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and most radiant beauty – which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their primitive form – this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of all religion.”

    Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity is probably the best known scientific equation. I revised it to help better understand the relationship between divine Essence (Spirit), matter (mass/energy: visible/dark) and consciousness (fx raised to its greatest power). Unlike the speed of light, which is a constant, there are no exact measurements for consciousness. In this hypothetical formula, basic consciousness may be of insects, to the second power of animals and to the third power the rational mind of humans. The fourth power is suprarational consciousness of mystics, when they intuit the divine essence in perceived matter. This was a convenient analogy, but there cannot be a divine formula.

  5. September 5, 2010 at 3:09 pm

    While I agree with the overall sentiment, I think that you’re over-selling the argument a bit. Hawking didn’t have to learn all of those things to get a doctorate in theoretical cosmology. (In fact, many of those fields – such as M-Theory and loop quantum gravity – didn’t even exist when he earned his doctorate.) So that list is certainly counting the things he’s learned since earning it.

    All the best,

  6. Rasool
    September 5, 2010 at 4:25 pm

    If we are here by chance then we defy all laws probability. The Sun is just far enough and close enough, the moon is the same way, just far enough and just close enough. We just so happen to have a magnetic field around us protecting us from radio active waves from the sun. The trees just so happen to emit oxygen and breath co2 and we just happen to breath oxygen and emit co2. And I could go on and on…. When we look around the universe we see these things are very very rare so far. Granted, we’ve only scratched the surface, but if it all comes from nothing I would think the surface would be full… I’m not super religious and I doubt it happened the way the books say, but I do think there’s a God. The fact that he’s invisible to us means little since radio waves are invisible to me yet I still listen to the radio, use wireless technology etc. Mr. Hawking hasn’t proven there is no god the same way I can’t prove there is. Yet I’ll keep my mind open to the possibility that there is no God as long as you keep your mind open to the chance that there is.

    • Tom Reed
      September 6, 2010 at 11:04 am

      The fact that something is rare is irrelevant (in a universe with billions of galaxies, each with billions of stars) still allows for many, many earth-like systems. The fact that you don’t see radio waves doesn’t mean that they can’t be measured and proven. And the fact is that there is no – zero – measurable evidence of god, ever. Don’t confuse a lack of understanding with unreality…it weakens your argument to the point that its not an argument at all. Sorry.

    • September 6, 2010 at 4:00 pm

      Yup. The law of large numbers in action. There are inevitably many planets that are just at the right distance from their respective stars, with gas giants to sweep away comets, etc. And any planet with a molten core will have a magnetic field. Multicellular organisms evolved to respire oxygen precisely because the atmosphere was changed to an oxidative one by the metabolism of cyanobacteria. There was no chance there.You are engaging in a round of “puddle thinking”.

      Oh, and that’s “Dr.” Hawking to you, Rasool. The man earned his degree in spades. And no, he hasn’t proven there is no god. His choice of words was deliberate. But if you are going to come here and say there is one, it is not up to us that do not beloieve in gods to prove your deity does not exist. It is up to YOU to provide he evidene that it does. Remember, you came here to comment and it’s open season on unjustified belief on an athiest blog.

      It woulld not be “open mindedness” to accept a burden of proof which is not ours. Note we have not said that there are no gods (we would then also have a burden of proof to meet). But if there is no evidence for the god you believe in, on what basis do you believe in it? If you believe in things just because you want to, you must necessarily believe in all manner of things, including beliefs that are mutually contradictory. I hope you have more than just a desire to believe to justify your beliefs. Because we act on what we believe, wrong beliefs inevitably lead to wrong actions.

    • August 9, 2011 at 5:30 am

      Someone else said, Tides go in and tides go out.” there are other people that have replied to your “argument” better than I intend to, but I just wanted to point out that your argument sounds an awful lot like Bill O’ Reilly’s. That guy knows nothing but spinning propaganda.

  7. Niki
    September 6, 2010 at 4:24 am

    would love to comment and I will once I stop laughing!

  8. September 6, 2010 at 2:58 pm

    God has not be proven scientifically. Neither have dark matter, dark energy, the Higgs bosun, or the M-theory.

    Science and religion are not mutually exclusive, nor are they totally inclusive. They both seem to have overlooked infinity and eternity.

    • September 6, 2010 at 3:39 pm

      This is wrong. We know dark matter and dark energy exist. We have observed their effects by observing eg. the motions of galaxies within galactic clusters. They have not been characterized, but that they exist is not in any serious doubt.

      The second paragraph I started to agree with. NOMA is totally ridiculous. The second sentence, though, is a complete non sequitur….

  9. September 6, 2010 at 4:40 pm

    Dark matter and dark energy are theoretically true (which implies that science can now directly study only 5% of the critical density of the Universe). Their true nature and empirical evidence of their existence is one of the many things hoped to be gained by use of the Hadron Collider.

    NOMA is a term I’m not familiar with. Most theoretical physicists believe there are dimensions beyond the spacetime continuum. Most mystics have been directly conscious of the infinite here and the eternal now. Space and time are useful concepts, but constrain our experience of life itself.

  10. September 6, 2010 at 5:13 pm

    Most mystics have been directly conscious of the infinite here and the eternal now.

    What the hell does that even mean? More non sequiturs. Word games.

    • September 7, 2010 at 1:37 pm

      If I asked “where are you here and now?” you might reply with your current address and time. It would also be true that here and now could refer to this city and day, this state and month, this country and year, this Earth and decade, this galaxy and century, this Universe and millennium. Continue on and eventually you will get to infinity and eternity, where we all are here and now.

      If you want get there sooner, give up your ego and individuality for a day and you may be directly conscious of the infinite here and eternal now at least for a few moments. It is an unforgettable experience.

      In the chapter “To the non-religious” in my e-book on comparative mysticism are two quotes which seem to apply:

      “The Tao is the law of nature, which you can’t depart from even for one instant. Thus the mature person looks into his own heart and respects what is unseen and unheard. Nothing is more manifest than the hidden; nothing is more obvious than the unseen. Thus the mature person pays attention to what is happening in his inmost self.” Tzu-ssu (483-402 BCE)
      Note: Grandson of Confucius, founder of a philosophy and doctrine of humanism…unlike the religion of Taoism.

      “Extensive as the ‘external’ world is it hardly bears comparison with the depth-dimensions of our inner being, which does not need even the spaciousness of the universe to be, in itself, almost unlimited. It seems to me, more and more, as though our ordinary consciousness inhabits the apex of a pyramid whose base in us…broadens out to such an extent that the farther we are able to let ourselves down into it, the more completely do we appear to be included in the realities of the earthly and, in the widest sense worldly [universal] existence, which are not dependent on time or space.” Rainer Maria Rilke (1875-1926)
      Note: German-language poet, acknowledged as one of the greatest of the 20th-century.

  11. Sandman
    September 7, 2010 at 3:51 am


    mate….nice one as always. Loved that graphic.

    If it cheers you up any I have some good news drawn from the UK press over the summer. Its University recruiting time, and economic woes means budgets are getting trimmed.

    Seems that three university schools of Theology have been given 12 months to pack their bags as they will be getting no more funding, inclduing one of the oldest in the UK. Its all to do with numbers….. not one school of Theology has managed to fill its student quotas, and the three that are being closed didnt even fill 50% of their places. So, in a choice between the Theology school or less funds for proper subjects, the unis concerned decided to shut down the bible waffle clubs.

    Over in the States no doubt that would be headline news. Its such a non story here in the secular UK that its made hardly any press at all.


    Hope that cheers you up.

    The news coverage about this book on each side of the great divide (aka Atlantic) is very revealing.

    Over here its a case of “Really? Thats interesting ….Well its about time he did. Phew that bloke is clever. Makes me proud to be Brit! Yes Id love a cup of tea…two sugars please. Oh the Archbishop of Cantebury says hes wrong… well what do you expect from a priest. F**king idiots….yes please, milk as well.”

    Over there its “La la la la la la Im not listening. What does he know? The Bible says hes wrong. Bill Donaghue says he s wrong…I have a doctorate too you know! Yes its in Bible Studies…what does that matter? IM A DOCTOR TOO!!!!!La la la la! My dentist says hes wrong too and HES a doctor! La la la la….”

    Says it all.

    Destroy the Cult of Opinion, (where the opinion of Joe the Plumber is just as important and relevant as Dr H’s)….and suffer less ignorant twaddle in your media.

    Just a suggestion.


    • September 7, 2010 at 6:39 am


      Your replies never fail to put a smile on my face. Thanks, again, for your British wit. Doctors of theology are somewhat of a joke. I can study basket weaving for eight years and get a doctorate in that. Doesn’t mean shit.


    • September 7, 2010 at 8:50 am

      Destroy the Cult of Opinion, (where the opinion of Joe the Plumber is just as important and relevant as Dr H’s)….and suffer less ignorant twaddle in your media.

      Exactly, Sandman. I’ve told several people commenting on Hawking’s comments that there is no reason for me to take their baseless opinion over – or even elevate it to anywhere near the same level of – a scientist expressing a conclusion within his field of expertise. It’s like that list of Drs. that the Disco Institute put out supporting ID. If you look up the names, it’s clear that it is most populated by dentists or even if they are scientists, they are in fields nowhere near related to biology.

      I hadn’t thought of seeing what ol’ Bill Donohue has to say on the matter. He’s always good for a laugh. No idea how he keeps from having a stroke every time some perceived attack on Catholicism comes along.

  12. September 7, 2010 at 9:30 am

    Non-Theists vs. Atheists

    Confucianism (unlike Taoism), much of Buddhism and most of the Samkhya of Hinduism are non-theistic: they simply omit the concept of God. Many atheists, however, seem intent on attacking the idea of God.

    Ultimate reality is what is is, whether we think, believe or desire otherwise. If there is a God, not believing does not change that. If there is no God, then believing will not make it so. Mystics seek the universal reality which underlies our conceptualizing and imagining. I was personally introduced to mysticism by a Nobel physicist who said “God is man’s greatest creation.” In my e-book on comparative mysticism is a chapter “To the non-religious.” You do not have to be religious or a believer in God to be a mystic, although most of the prominent mystics were both.

    • Sandman
      September 9, 2010 at 7:44 am

      “You do not have to be religious or a believer in God to be a mystic”..

      No…you have to me a morally bankrupt snake oil salesman who dresses up basic common sense in obscurantist twaddle to give it that Siegfried and Roy sparkle. Add a few thees and thous, hammer on the anvil of dogma, and you have yourself a faith.

      That or a coward to afraid to admit there is no Santa because that might mean no prezzies at Christmas.

      And dont use your oriental mystic faiths as examples of how it should be done. I lived in India for a few years, and I now live in the quasi Buddhist theocracy that is Thailand.

      Every day in India I had to deal with people kept poor, ignorant and undertrod by Hindhu faith, and had to deal with the snake oil salesmen who conned the public out of the hard earned pennies they had. I packed up and moved on when I got to the point of wanting to kick Sadhus in the face whenever I saw one scrounging around like the filthy dope addled hobos they are. Or shall we discuss the link between Hindhu mysticism and Thuggee….or Suttee? Murderous human sacrificial faiths the colonial forces wiped out and that have now returned?

      Now I live in Buddhist la la land and see the same ignorance and flummery keep these people poor and ignorant as they slavishly fawn to men in saffron. Mystics abound, and astrologers have a say in how things are run. Buddhist supremisicm permits the human rights abuses of Burmese and Lao hill peoples in the north, and facilitates massacres at mosques in the south. And lets not forget in Sri Lanka it has been Sinhalese Buddhist monks who kept the fires of anti-Tamil hatred burning so bright.

      Religion and quasi religious philosophies like Confucianism are equally wicked, evil and corrupt to the core. They breed ignorance, keep people in their place and undertrod, stifle progress and reason, and divide instead of cohering.

      You say mystic, I say con man or coward.

      Take your pick.

    • August 9, 2011 at 1:25 pm

      Ron, quit trying to sell your e-book here. No one is buying it (literally or figuratively).

  13. September 9, 2010 at 9:27 am

    Sandman, Wow that was some reply! I attended Lucknow University on a Carnegie grant and revisited India as a tour manager and later as an airline exec. I was Sales Development Manager for Thai Airways International in N. America – assigned to Bangkok for six months- then DOS-NA for the Oriental Hotel.

    Your experiences and mine were quite different. There are charlatans and deluded believers in every religion in every country. Look for the worst and you will usually find it. Fortunately, I found the best of India, Thailand, Hinduism, and Buddhism. I’ve met 19 mystics in 12 countries – including those of Christianity, Judaism and Islam- who inspired my e-book. They were wonderful, intelligent people…some quite prominent.

    • oliver
      May 18, 2011 at 8:11 am

      Is your e-book for free… or are ytou trying to sell us some snake oil?

      • May 18, 2011 at 8:15 am

        I am a full time writer and author. This is how I earn money. If you owned a store would you give your product away? I don’t sell snake oil. If you want fiction, pick up a copy of the bible.

      • Spart
        May 18, 2011 at 8:42 am

        Bit of a misunderstanding here. @Al Stefanelli, it looks like oliver’s question wasn’t being posed to you.

        • May 18, 2011 at 9:18 am

          Such are the detriments of Mobile WordPress…

  14. September 10, 2010 at 5:41 pm

    I couldn’t agree with you more, anyway l love your site layout. Is nice and clean.

    • Sandman
      October 5, 2010 at 3:24 am

      “Suppose a doctor, who has never performed surgery, wants to operate on you. This operation has never been performed before by anyone, and is based on a new and untested branch of medicine. Furthermore, many other doctors are critical of the proposed procedure.

      A pastor advises you to find a different doctor.”

      So your pastor is a medical expert is he, well trained and up to speed on medical developments? A qualified specialist in whatever problem it is that ails you?

      Or just a piano toothed twat in a shiny suit waving his big book o iron age authority and righteousness? Someone who has sod all idea but believes God whispers in his ear so he must be right?

      My guess is its the latter.

      You carry on listening to the pastor my friend, and I hope one day he gives you the wrong advice and you end up seriously hurt or even better dead.

      That way the average IQ level of your idiocracy may just go up a few fractions of a point, and there will be one less deluded idiot for us to worry about.

      Carry on buzzing and itching my flea friend….you provide more ammo for our fight with every word you type.

      • October 6, 2010 at 6:09 pm

        Atheism without rationality is the worst religion ever invented.

        Ever hear of a straw man argument? Ad hominem attack? Ispe dixit?

        We’ve got all three going on here. What we don’t have is any attempt to analyze the substance of Hawking’s claim. There’s no mention of the fact that other physicists, with resumes as impressive as Hawking’s, disagree with him.

        The point of my analogy is that it does’t matter whether the doctor has gone to medical school. There are plenty of other doctors who are qualified specialists, experts up to speed on medical developments, who disagree with the first doctor. The pastor doesn’t meed a medical degree to point that out.

        What you’re doing is going cherry picking through science for what you want to believe and calling anyone who disagrees with you a fool. That’s exactly what Young Earth Creationists do.

        Like I said–atheism without rationality is a religion, and it’s a fucking godawful one. At least the creationists admit they’re religious.

        If you believe in something just because Stephen Hawking himself said it, then your belief is based on authority, just like any faith. Either examine his claim rationally, or have the intellectual honestly to admit that you’re in the same boat with Pat Robertson.

      • October 6, 2010 at 6:09 pm

        *edit: doesn’t matter whether the _pastor_ has gone to medical school

      • sirene
        May 18, 2011 at 9:29 am

        But atheists really are technically agnostics that just “practice” atheism…we wait for evidence and ideas and hypotheses change quite often…it’s not really religious…sure there is cherry picking…I like the idead of many cyclic big bangs…but I’m agnostic about that and numerous other hypotheses. Atheists are all agnostics about many things. But yes, you’re right atheism without rationality goes against the “free-thinking” movement

      • sirene
        May 18, 2011 at 9:33 am

        Also, most define the term atheist as a LACK of belief in the supernatural…which implies that potential that if evidence suggested otherwise the position would change

  15. Sandman
    October 5, 2010 at 3:13 am

    Hey Al!

    Congrats mate…you have now graduated to Senior Atheist level as it appears you have a flea upon your back.

    Well done bro.

  16. calum macdonald
    May 18, 2011 at 12:33 pm

    elevating the opinions of mr. hawking because he has a doctorate issued to him by other men of science is the same as christians saying god is real because the bible says he real…of course it does, god supposedly wrote it…just like professors wrote the books which steven hawking studied…the theories in these books are not infallible, they are also the ideas of men to explain the unknown…

    • Barry Johnstone
      May 19, 2011 at 5:15 am

      Hey Calum, The parallel you draw in the first part of your first sentence doesn’t make any sense. You are making the assumption that a god is real – or may not be. Science, on the other hand IS! No theory or opinion is infallible, and the human species will continue to have ideas that may or may not fly!

  17. August 9, 2011 at 12:05 am

    Facetious argument. Being well grounded in terms of academic knowledge and a genius does not necessarily make Hawking correct. Science can only address phenomena open to use of the scientific method. Neither inductive nor deductive reason are fully scientific. They are in fact philosophical and logical method of proposing certain kinds of statements which may or may not be correct. I think Hawkings is a wonder. But I am not convinced he is correct.

    • August 9, 2011 at 2:49 am

      Maybe Hawking is not correct. Maybe one day someone will prove that Hawking is not correct. But he (or she) will be a scientist, not a theologian.

    • August 9, 2011 at 2:51 am

      Of course it does not make him correct, but if you bother to check his maths you will find that his conclusions do stand up or at worse, point in the right direction. Can we do that with the theologian? Can we see the workings of the godbotherers? For me if anyone can show mathematically that Hawking has made a mistake and his work is invalid, I will drop kick him to the curb as he deserves.

      The worst ploy of the theologian, is that for a thing to be true, you must just believe it to be true, and it will become so.

  18. August 16, 2011 at 4:26 pm

    This was a fantastic article that compares the dogma studies of theologians versus the scientific studies of a cosmologist of such giant thinkers as Stephen Hawking. There is no comparison when giving credibility to one over the other. Stephen Hawking makes any theologian look like a basketcase.

  19. Dennis9248
    November 28, 2011 at 5:13 pm


Leave a Reply