News24

Stephen Hawking: Heaven is a myth

2011-05-16 13:00

London - Famed theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking finds no room for heaven in his vision of the cosmos.

In an interview published on Monday in The Guardian newspaper, the 69-year-old said the human brain is a like a computer that will stop working when its components fail.

"There is no heaven or afterlife for broken-down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark," he said.

In Grand Design, a book published in 2010, Hawking had declared that it was "not necessary to invoke God... to get the universe going."

Hawking is nearly totally paralysed by motor neurone disease, diagnosed when he was 21.

Hawking said he is not afraid of death, but added: "I'm in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first."

Comments
  • Johan - 2011-05-16 13:05

    And so the religious vs athiest flame wars start anew...

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:13

      Gravity exists but science cannot even proof how or why it exists.Yet it exists becuase we experience it. So if they cannot proof something that exists right infront of their noses in every single piece of matter how the f^&k are they supposed to prove subtle aspects of creation like heaven????

      Ben - 2011-05-16 14:15

      It's like those big fights between soccer holigans. Just go in swing you fists and run away! Hahaha! So much fun...

      Nick - 2011-05-16 14:22

      @yamadhoota - At least they understand proper grammar.

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:22

      Science cannot prove that gravity exists even after building the largest atom collider on earth at a cost of 7.5billion euros. They still cannot find the Higgs Boson gravity particle even after all that waste of money. Yet this arrogant pr&*k in a wheelchair boldly declares that heaven does not exist when they cannot even explain simple things like gravity. If science cannot prove that gravity exists why the f^&*k does science believe in gravity - maybe they should say gravity is a MYTH! Idiots.

      wesleywt - 2011-05-16 14:25

      @yamadhoota. Fail... Einsteins theory of general relativity has just been confirmed again by Gravity Space Probe B. You just an example of religious types who lack the imagination to see how incredible the world is without having to invent supernatural beings to worship and kill for.

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:42

      @wesleywt - Confirmation of general relativity has nothing to do with the "God particle" that gives atom it's mass and thence offers a close enough explaination of why matter attracts itself. Maybe you should brush up on your physics. Even ancient scriptures of min. age 5ooo years old confirmed time relativity by stating that time on higher planets in the universe go slower than time on earth hence superior life forms exist for longer lifetimes than us.

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:52

      @yamadhoota - the Higgs boson is not required to explain mass in the atom.

      LloydSix - 2011-05-16 15:01

      So what you are saying Yamadhoota is that if something has not yet been explained by science it must be supernatural? Gravity has been proven and they know how or why it exists.

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 15:33

      You cannot explain gravity without talking about mass. Science should not believe in Gravity if they cannot see it becuase science does not believe in anything it cannot see. Einsteins "theory" is just that a theroretical explaination using maths and physics - it is completely different to what the large hadron collider is trying to do - which is actually trying to see the Higgs Boson and not theoretically derive it.

      Ben - 2011-05-16 15:35

      @yamadhoota - FAIL!!!!!!! "Science cannot prove that gravity exists..." Hahahahahaha!!!!! You need to stop talking before you hurt yourself. DOES NOBODY READ ANYMORE!?!?!?!

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 15:57

      No - science has theoretically derived gravity but NOT shown what causes gravity. This cause lies in particle physics - this is where scientist fail. They use gravity in calculations but they have not physically proven its existence in any lab anywhere in the world.They so badly want to prove it they have thrown billions of euros at the problem. Everyone know it exists - that is what is so infuriating and what is supposed to be so simple if I jump up something pulls me down. It's and invisible particle stream that links two bodies of masses.You can calculate it but you cannot see it. Ben and wesley - if science was just happy with theory do you think they will spend billions in experiment. Theory needs to be experimentally proven even up to the point of particle physics just like Bohr theoretically derived electrons but the existence if an electron was experimentally proven using atom colliders. Similarly they need to prove gravity using atom colliders but they have failed. Theory needs foundation in real life. Yet even after failing to experimentally prove gravity does not exist should they now stop believing in it even though theoretical prove exists?

      wesleywt - 2011-05-16 16:01

      Ahhhhhh...... Stupid people should be banned from using the internet. Einstein has shown that gravity is the attraction of two bodies caused by their warping of space time. Particle physics has nothing to do with it. The reason they are "desperate" and throwing "large amounts of euro's" at it is BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING THEIR JOB!!!!!!! They have a hypothesis that the particle that contributes mass to an atom is the Higgs Boson. Now they are TESTING to see if the hypothesis is true. If it is not, then they will find a new hypothesis to explain mass and test that. That is science in action. You are criticizing them for doing their jobs. How else are they suppose to figure things out? Einsteins explanation of gravity has been shown to be true so far. This is what you posted as your first argument. Scientist CANNOT PROVE GRAVITY EXISTS.

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 16:19

      Ehhh...Wesley - actually you are STUPID !. Let me slow this down to your pace : Why are you stupid? Anwer: The "warping" of time and space does not cause gravity because if it did then science will have to first EXPERIMENTALLY prove that time-space actually warps before they categorically accept the "theory" as FACT. Hence they honestly state Einsteins theory as a "THEORY" not as Einsteins " FACT". And how the f^&*k are they going to do that if they are also "warping" with time-space themselves? NOW DO YOU GET MY POINT. WHICH TWO MAJOR INSTITUIONS ON EARTH HAVE LOADS OF THEORY WITHOUT ACTUAL PROOF ? ANSWER : SCIENCE AND RELIGION. Science is just a religion ultimately so why is science picking on religion in the first place. Don't have a big mouth if you did not undertand the point I was making.

      JMan - 2011-05-16 16:23

      @ yamadhoota: I remember a time when reliogious enthusiast claimed that the earth was flat and that the sun orbited the earth, which was supoosed to be the centre of God's universe. I remember countless of such 'theories' that the church said science can never proove. Mots recently, Evolution. What I remember most though, is science PROVING them wrong EVERY TIME!! So give it time....just because some things haven't been proven yet, doesn't mean they're wrong. Please note: NO ONE COULD EVER REALLY PROOVE THE EXISTANCE OF ANY GOD!

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 17:53

      Yamadhoota...your applying some interesting points but your alternative is flawed. Just because humanity has been unable to explain what mass is, according to you the alternative must be God. The amount of money spent in Switzerland is meaningless as the value of something does not equate to scientific progress. You could argue that penicillin was discovered for free. In simply turns because i do not have the money or technology to prove that world is round/spherical or what ever am i allowed to use that as proof that the world is flat?

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 21:44

      No - the alternative is not neccessarily God - the logical conclusion is science is flawed at the particle level i.e. the level that actually counts for reality. Therefore science is inperfect and so is religion BUT science has no standing at all to even begin to critisize religion becuase science hasn't cleaned up its own house - why must it go shyte in someone elses??

      frederick777 - 2011-05-17 09:31

      OVER FIVE MILLION REASONS WHY I WILL NOT BE VOTING ANC There are over five million reasons why I will not be voting for the African National Congress (ANC) in the upcoming elections on 18 May 2011: 1. Over one million babies have been killed by abortion in South Africa - officially, legally, often with tax payers' money - since the ANC legalized abortion-on-demand, 1 February 1997. "Deliver those who are drawn toward death. And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter." Proverbs 24:11 2. Over 500,000 people have been murdered in South Africa since 1994 - under the ANC government - yet the ANC has steadfastly refused to consider re-instating the death penalty for murder. Nor have they been willing to put the matter to a referendum. "Bloodshed pollutes the land and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it." Numbers 35:33 3. Over one million women and children have been raped in the 17 years of ANC rule (and that is just using the reported rape statistics) - while pornography has been legalised. Reportedly, less than 7% of reported rapes result in convictions. "Why do people commit crimes so readily? Because crime is not punished quickly enough." Ecclesiastes 8:11 4. The ANC is soft on the criminals and hard on the victims of crime. Rather than fight crime effectively, the ANC have worked to disarm the potential victims of crime, denying firearm licenses to tens of thousands of law abiding citizens, and claiming that self-defence is not a legitimate reason for owning a firearm! Rather than support community initiatives to fight crime, the ANC have frustrated communities by demanding that security barriers be removed from crime-afflicted suburbs. "Stop doing wrong, learn to do right! Seek justice." Isaiah 1:16-17 5. The ANC's Ministry of Education has evidenced a generally hostile attitude to Christianity, insensitivity to the concerns of parents and prejudice against the Bible. Kadar Asmal's anti-Christian policies and the unworkable Outcomes Based Education curriculum 2005, dumbed-down education and turned government schools into recruitment centres for radical homosexual groups. "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge." Hosea 4:6 6. The ANC's Affirmative Action, Black Economic Empowerment and blind support for Mugabe's racist and tyrannical policies have chased away investors and cost the South African economy millions of jobs. According to the JSE, the net worth of South Africa over the first 10 years of ANC rule shrunk by over 30%. And the Rand under the ANC has plummeted from R2 to the US dollar to R7 to $1. "Do not use dishonest standards...Use honest scales and honest weights...I am the Lord your God." Leviticus 19:35-36 7. Rates and taxes are higher and government services are lower. Despite increased rates and taxes the filthy, litter strewn, graffiti-vandalised communities testify to the incompetence of government. "You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting..." Daniel 5:27 8. Corruption has flourished under the ANC to such an extent that the ANC is being referred to in the streets as the Abortion, Nepotism and Corruption party. "They claim to know God but by their actions they deny Him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good." Titus 1:16 9. The endless propaganda and pornographic programmes on state TV - which is supported by compulsory "licences". "Who will rise up for Me against the wicked? Who will take a stand for Me against evildoers?" Psalm 94:16 10. The arrogance of so many in the ANC and the arbitrary manner in which they ride roughshod over the concerns and freedoms of others - such as the Minister of Health refusing to meet over a thousand concerned doctors; and how their ICASA has attempted to close down many Christian and community radio stations in South Africa. "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people." Proverbs 14:34 The Bible instructs us to "select capable men from all the people - men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain - and appoint them as officials..." Exodus 18:21 Evidently ANC candidates fail to qualify on Biblical grounds. Mobilise Your Congregation to Think Before They Ink! The South African Biblical Issues Voters' Guide aims to inform Christians about the different political parties' track record and policies on pro-life, pro-family, and free enterprise issues.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 12:47

      @yamadhoota Gravity can be quantified, measured and its effects predicted. Would you like to try the same with an old myth, at least to the level that we have gravity understood?

      Zion - 2011-05-17 13:08

      To those clowns outside a wheel chair: The incomprehensible aspect of falling and the incomprehensible perception of "down" and "up" is enough proof. Those same clown referred to above would not understand what warped space is either. But they will argue to hide their ignorance.

      Zion - 2011-05-17 13:17

      Yamadhoota, Now you really put your boot in your mouth, Let us forget about the 5oooyrs ago story: that is bulldust. People living on higher planets live longer than us. Let us refer to higher planets as larger planets. On larger planets with greater mass the gravity is greater and time is dependent on gravity. So on larger planets with greater gravity time runs slower and sadly humans and other living things depend on time to stay alive. How can you relate the passage of time on a larger planet with mother earth? Try the clock test. Thanks for the laugh.

      John - 2012-01-05 23:50

      Atheist: Mao Tse Tung, and the Chinese Communist Party; 200 Million Political Assassinations 200 Million Killed by Ignorance 200 Million Killed by Incompetence 200 Million Killed by Negligence 2,4 Billion Killed by Abortion ( 1,2 Billion population, women 600 Million, 2 generations = 1,2 million, 1 child Law, no contraceptives provided, 2 abortions per woman, 2,4 Billion Killed by Abortion ). A Genocide of over 3 Billion. Atheist: Stalin, and the Russian Communist Party 100 Million Political Assassinations 100 Million Killed by Ignorance 100 Million Killed by Incompetence 100 Million Killed by Negligence 300 Million Killed by Abortion ( 300 Million population, women 150 Million, 2 generations = 300 Million, no contraceptives provided, 1 abortions per woman, 300 Million Killed by Abortion ). A Genocide of over 700 Million. Atheist: Hitler, and the NAZI Party: 56 Million in 2 World Ward Pol Pot, and Cambodia Communist Party: 5 Million Thabo Mbeki, and ANC 5 Million by denial of medication to aids sufferers Repeat for East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tadzhik, Kirghistan, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, Venezuela, Tanzania, Mozambique, Zimbabwe. And the mentally challenged Socialist Parties, which define themselves as Anti God. Ammunition is what the ATHEISTS use to Genocide 6 Billion. Just in the Last 100 Years.

      Derek Francois - 2013-05-09 07:36

      Mere man cannot cure motor neuron desease and yet he can clearly explain our existence..................sure.

  • freddie van eyk - 2011-05-16 13:05

    Don't need to be a genius to figure that one out.

      Hope777 - 2011-05-16 14:25

      1 Korinthiers 1:21-22 & 1 Korinthiers 3:18

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:32

      Extremely wealthy people live on this planet with you and I. Yet because the qaulity of life they live is so far detached from what you and I will ever experience even for a single day of our lives they might as well be living on another planet. Heaven is simply another planet in this universe where residents enjoy better facilities of live free from disease, old age and death.

      Cornix - 2011-05-16 15:11

      Stupid atheist scientists who always want to physically see something before they believe in it.

      Ben - 2011-05-16 15:38

      Stupid religious zealots who always believes in this just because somebody told them to.

      Cornix - 2011-05-16 17:03

      @Ben, well, is science not also told that way?

      Ben - 2011-05-17 13:04

      Proof normally follows theory..

  • nic69ers - 2011-05-16 13:05

    They see me rolling, im HATING! hahaha!! Rather keep you views to yourself R2-D2!! No one asked you so keep rolling!

      user_64 - 2011-05-16 13:33

      Wow, really intelligent nic69ers...

      Ben - 2011-05-16 13:53

      Hawking 1 -0 Dumbass Biggot

      Albo - 2011-05-16 14:19

      I think Hawking`s wheelchair has more intellegence than nic69ers!!

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:47

      Hawking is an idiot becuase he believes in things he can only see like the human brain. He supposedly does not believe in subtle matter like the soul becuase he cannot see it. Yet he is a biggot because he believes in things like gravity even though he cannot see it or proof it in any science lab including a 7.5 bil euro one !

      LloydSix - 2011-05-16 14:59

      What a dumbass. You sir are an idiot, Hawking is one of the most influential human beings alive, the man is a genius and here you are calling him R2D2.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 12:50

      //Hawking is an idiot becuase he believes in things he can only see like the human brain.// Fail. This can be quantified, tested and proved to exists. It's not a belief its a scientific fact. //He supposedly does not believe in subtle matter like the soul becuase he cannot see it.// Fail. On what grounds do you get to define a new type of matter? "Subtle matter"? Really. There is NO evidence for the soul. None. Whatsoever. //Yet he is a biggot because he believes in things like gravity even though he cannot see it or proof it in any science lab including a 7.5 bil euro one !// Fail. Gravity can be proven and its effects measured.

      Zion - 2011-05-17 13:22

      Yamadhoota, I would hate to have an IQ test against Steven Hawking. The guy is a genius even if you cannot live with it. Accept it as you are making a fool of yourself.

  • JR - 2011-05-16 13:16

    En die Formule om dit te staaf is???

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:13

      Celebrities don't need to profer up facts.

  • george - 2011-05-16 13:16

    the whole universe exists by design. the clockwork of the cosmos is not accidental. Hawkings is bitter against God for his terrible physical affliction. there is no way that a human mind can contemplate Gods grand plan, hence the defeatist stance taken by theoretical physicists such as Hawken. You cannot use the highly limited physical brains to unravel deeper spiritual issues such as the existence of God or heaven. since man's brains are limited such as computers, that does not mean that God does not exist. The physical manifestation of the universe is proof enough that a bigger spiritual and unbelievably powerful, omnipresent God exists in other planes and realms beyond our petty comprehension.

      daaivark - 2011-05-16 13:20

      If you read his work you will see absolutely no bitterness. Your argument is not vaguely logical, with respect. His name, for interest, is Hawking. When attempting to criticise someone, please try and get the name right.

      djpentz - 2011-05-16 13:38

      daaivark, do atheists have like a manual on how to debate a creationist? why do all atheists immediately zone in on any spelling mistakes? really, it's a bit cliched (sorry no thingy on the e - please don't get too excited about that). "ad hominem"--

      sahara - 2011-05-16 13:53

      @ djpentz - no we atheists just use a thing called "commom sense"

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 13:54

      @djpentz - because it doesn't help your argument when you can't get the person's name correct, even though it is in the article.

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 13:54

      "No human mind can contemplate Gods grand plan"-Therefor you admit that the idea of heaven and hell can be a huge misunderstanding as humans try to fathom something more powerful then us. Now that we got that out the way we can only really base our judgement on intelligence and since i highly doubt you are smarter the Hawkins and even with your unsupported affirmations that "Hawkins is bitter against God because...." i can safely say that i would rather go with Hawking then you. Just because we are unable to understand how the universe functions we cant use that as an excuse to believe in a big powerful being.

      Ben - 2011-05-16 13:56

      Please refrain from making comments like this before you read his work.

      daaivark - 2011-05-16 13:56

      djpentz - not simply a spelling mistake. It is disrespectful to misspell someone's name, not to mention just silly, as it appears in big bold letters. It really does not say much for the thoroughness of the critic. And for the record, I am not an atheist. Nor am I religious. I couldn't care less about formal religion. So watch those assumptions please. I know that religion is essentially based on assumptions, but let's try to keep them out of discourse.

      daaivark - 2011-05-16 13:58

      You will note that I am not even attempting to debate. I simply dismiss the assumption (again) that the man is bitter). Debate involves an intellectual exchange - not possible in matters of belief.

      static - 2011-05-16 14:18

      Hawking is not that clever, his views on how space works especially with regards to black holes was debunked.

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:22

      @static - have you studied much theoretical physics?

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 14:59

      @ daaivark - If 7.5 bil euros is not enough money to spend just to view the gravity particle even for a split second - how much money and effort did it take in the first place to actually create the particle during the big bang when you cannot even see it now what to speak of actually manipulating the elements that manufactured it way back then when mathematics and physics supposedly did not exist? With so much complexity existent in the universe do you actually expect us to believe if we take lumps of metal, glass, wood and all things material - bang them together - even to produce something as simple and as complex as a clock ??? WHat to speak of the universe? F^&k sake - you scientific types are more daft than I thought.

      LloydSix - 2011-05-16 15:04

      @Static - Please refrain from commenting on subjects that you are uneducated on.

      daaivark - 2011-05-16 15:20

      @ yamadhoota: I am not remotely a scientific type, and what the hell the accelerator costs to run has nothing to do with any of this. I simply try to be rational. Useful sometimes, that.

      Looter - 2011-05-16 15:24

      he did not say anything about god!

      pwcrook - 2011-05-16 16:00

      I hate the way that religious people argue that it is because science is arrogant that we reject religious "truths". Science does not merely pull an answer out of a hat based on emotions and social conventions, but rather draws the most likely conclusion based on evidence and reason. In other words science is not black and white, but says this is the most likely answer based on our current understanding. It is religion that shows true arrogance by providing a definite static conclusion assuming that what someone wrote down 2000 years ago is the truth.

      pwcrook - 2011-05-16 16:03

      By the way, I have nothing against religious people - they do some truly wonderful things on a personal level, and many tend to be loving caring people. I just don't like it when atheist get attacked on their beliefs. If you are allowed to say that heaven exists and not get insulted, I should be allowed to say that it doesn't.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 12:57

      //the whole universe exists by design. the clockwork of the cosmos is not accidental// Just because you say so doesn't mean it's true. If you want to postulate something this extroadinary you will need to justify it (at minimum to the length that Hawking refutes this in "The Grand Design") //Hawkings is bitter against God for his terrible physical affliction// As has already been mentioned you will not find bitterness in his work, only great wonder. In addition Hawking doesn't beleive there is a god, this is a long way off from believing and being angry at a god. The two are mutually exclusive. If you don't understand why people are atheists you may want to try asking, instead of trying to squeeze us into your religious framework. //You cannot use the highly limited physical brains to unravel deeper spiritual issues such as the existence of God or heaven// //The physical manifestation of the universe is proof enough that a bigger spiritual and unbelievably powerful, omnipresent God exists// What? We can't know if theres a god but because of the universe we can? If god is outside the realm of human understanding, this would include you in this mix, and therefore we cannot take anything you say on the subject seriously. The invisible and the non-existant look very similar.

      Zion - 2011-05-17 13:30

      Hey George, where was god when the yanks dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Why did he look away when he knew what was going to happen even before it happened. I can ask "Why did He" a million times and get no reasonable response from him or mankind. We live in a pretty sick continuum to believe in a god who provides the 10 commandments yet allows the Hitlers and Stalins and Maos to get away with what He opposes.

      Zion - 2011-05-17 19:04

      Youmadhooter, Let us put it in simple logic. When the primeval particle blew up and created the universe the mathematics and physics were created at the same time from the initial blast. What is said here is that the math and physics were part of the blast and actually caused it. Ok, so you don't get it: Call God the Mathematics and the particle the physics. Or..... Oh hell this will carry on forever. Just imagine there is no heaven or no hell as John Lennon so wisely said.

  • SaligSondaar - 2011-05-16 13:20

    Sad, in a way - would have been nice to imagine him in heaven with a fully functional body - running over the clouds, chasing after pretty little female angels...

  • nobody - 2011-05-16 13:23

    I want to post a story I have heard: An Atheist Professor of Philosophy was speaking to his Class on the Problem Science has with GOD, the ALMIGHTY. He asked one of his New Christian Students to stand and . . . Professor : You are a Christian, aren't you, son ? Student : Yes, sir. Professor : So, you Believe in GOD ? Student : Absolutely, sir. Professor : Is GOD Good ? Student : Sure. Professor : Is GOD ALL - POWERFUL ? Student : Yes. Professor : My Brother died of Cancer even though he Prayed to GOD to Heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn't. How is this GOD good then? Hmm? (Student was silent ) Professor : You can't answer, can you ? Let's start again, Young Fella. Is GOD Good? Student : Yes. Professor : Is Satan good ? Student : No. Professor : Where does Satan come from ? Student : >From . . . GOD . . . Professor : That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this World? Student : Yes. Professor : Evil is everywhere, isn't it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct? Student : Yes. Professor : So who created evil ? (Student did not answer) Professor : Is there Sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the World, don't they? Student : Yes, sir. Professor : So, who Created them ? (Student had no answer) Professor : Science says you have 5 Senses you use to Identify and Observe the World around you. Tell me, son . . . Have you ever Seen GOD? Student : No, sir. Professor : Tell us if you have ever Heard your GOD? Student : No , sir. Professor : Have you ever Felt your GOD, Tasted your GOD, Smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any Sensory Perception of GOD for that matter? Student : No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't. Professor : Yet you still Believe in HIM? Student : Yes. Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Student : Nothing. I only have my Faith. Professor : Yes, Faith. And that is the Problem Science has. Student : Professor, is there such a thing as Heat? Professor : Yes. Student : And is there such a thing as Cold? Professor : Yes. Student : No, sir. There isn't. (The Lecture Theatre became very quiet with this turn of events ) Student : Sir, you can have Lots of Heat, even More Heat, Superheat, Mega Heat, White Heat, a Little Heat or No Heat. But we don't have anything called Cold. We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as Cold. Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat. We cannot Measure Cold. Heat is Energy. Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it. (There was Pin-Drop Silence in the Lecture Theatre ) Student : What about Darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as Darkness? Professor : Yes. What is Night if there isn't Darkness? Student : You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the Absence of Something You can have Low Light, Normal Light, Bright Light, Flashing Light . .. .. But if you have No Light constantly, you have nothing and it’s called Darkness, isn't it? In reality, Darkness isn't. If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness Darker, wouldn't you? Professor : So what is the point you are making, Young Man ? Student : Sir, my point is your Philosophical Premise is flawed. Professor : Flawed ? Can you explain how? Student : Sir, you are working on the Premise of Duality. You argue there is Life and then there is Death, a Good GOD and a Bad GOD. You are viewing the Concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure.. Sir, Science can't even explain a Thought. It uses Electricity and Magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view Death as the Opposite of Life is to be ignorant of the fact that Death cannot exist as a Substantive Thing. Death is Not the Opposite of Life: just the Absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your Students that they evolved from a Monkey? Professor : If you are referring to the Natural Evolutionary Process, yes, of course, I do. Student : Have you ever observed Evolution with your own eyes, sir? (The Professor shook his head with a Smile, beginning to realize where the Argument was going ) Student : Since no one has ever observed the Process of Evolution at work and Cannot even prove that this Process is an On-Going Endeavour, Are you not teaching your Opinion, sir? Are you not a Scientist but a Preacher? (The Class was in Uproar ) Student : Is there anyone in the Class who has ever seen the Professor's Brain? (The Class broke out into Laughter ) Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's Brain, Felt it, touched or Smelt it? . . . No one appears to have done so. So, according to the Established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that You have No Brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then Trust your Lectures, sir? (The Room was Silent. The Professor stared at the Student, his face unfathomable) Professor : I guess you'll have to take them on Faith, son. Student : That is it sir . . Exactly ! The Link between Man & GOD is FAITH.

      Charles - 2011-05-16 13:45

      sorry, but this is rubbish. Arguing that evil is simply the absence of good only serves to offer an alternative definition of a well known concept. On the other hand, it offers no explanation as to why any God would allow evil in some instances and not others. Even if we accept that evil is simply an absence of goodness, how does your God decide who to be good to and who not? Either God is responsible for everything that happens in this world and he is not good, or he is not responsible for everything, and is therefore not all-powerful. Your anecdotal example (copied and pasted from some website where cracks are papered over by faith) does not speak to Steven Hawkings' comments, nor does it provide a reasoned argument for any form of God except one that has to be believed in without proper evidence.

      rantoftheday - 2011-05-16 13:46

      Um, evolution can be observed and has been done so with species of flies. On a genetic level all human beings are identical. Skin color etc. are features that have evolved due to factors like geographic location.

      Justin - 2011-05-16 13:48

      The mindlessness of this is quite staggering... I shudder at the thought of you roaming the streets. A clear danger to yourself and others. Do you only think that the things you see exist? I've never seen someone shot in the head, but I tend to go along with the generally help opion that this has a good chance of killing you. Similarily I am able to infer that the Professor has a brain. He walks, he talks and he lives, generally good indication of brain activity. Most of us humans are able to logically follow an argument. We don't take it on faith that bullets smashing through your skull and turning your brain to mush kill you. We understand a number of the mechanisms involved in this. Maybe try shooting yourself in the head to see what happens.

      Vitruvian Man - 2011-05-16 14:05

      BRILLIANT!!!

      Ben - 2011-05-16 14:07

      HAHAHAHA!!!!! @Nobody... It's called books. Read them. I know you're not aloud to pick fruit from the tree of knowledge, but come on!! It 2011. Try it!

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 14:15

      I am not going into everything wrong with this post buy I will highlight the failed flaw of this logic and the beauty science has over religion…science is allowed to be wrong and is allowed to compromise. Student: Is there cold? Professor: yes Student: No…. But we don't have anything called Cold. We can hit 458 Degrees below Zero which is No Heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as Cold. Cold is only a Word we use to describe the Absence of Heat. We cannot Measure Cold. Heat is Energy. Cold is Not the Opposite of Heat, sir, just the Absence of it. Professor: Interesting point…ok yes there is no cold, it is merely a measurable comparable point that is used in the common language. It is subject to subjection as well. I concede there is no cold…please continue? Science is swayed by evidence and though extrapolation is involved there is evidence pointing towards the existence of evolution...can the same be said about god. The perfect harmony on the universe cannot point to god for two reasons: The universe is not finely balanced, it is a violent place where whole universes are created, collide and are destroyed with such unfathomable force there is almost no point talking about it. We just happen to live on a planet at a point in time where our environment is stable and supports and encourages life. But in the grand scheme of things that point in time is not even a blink of an eye compared to the history of the cosmos. We came from chaos and we will return to chaos and the impact humanity will leave will be neglagable. Second point is if I cannot prove to that we exist on a round planet or evolution is real then is the religious folk immediately able to say “therefor there must be a powerful being controlling our lives.” Science has the ability to adapt and change. Religion should not enjoy that privilege because despite this little stories says, religion is around finites s One god, one hell, one heaven...this for our complex world.

      JB - 2011-05-16 14:28

      Sigh. I really shouldnt bother responding, but I feel compelled - like a moth to flame. But this is the reason creationists exit. Either lack of education or just pure, blatant, retardness - supported by huge assumptions and taking even bigger liberties. So 1.) We have an atheist Professor of philosophy, not physics or evolutionary anthropology, but I would bet very educated nevertheless - So. I would challenge the author to find such a professor who does not understand what dark and cold are. My daughter understands and she isnt in primary school. Huge assumption number one - *gasp* can we hear a pin drop? More drama please. 2.) No human ever evolved from a monkey. This is impossible. No one who has ever bothered to read a single article on evolution (the author clearly hasnt), believes this. Mammals evolved from common ancestors. Monkeys and humans share a common ancestor. I wouldnt expect the author to write a thesis on evolutionary anthropology but at least have a vague idea what evolutionists are on about before you critique it - otherwise you just look like an uneducated tit. 3.) No one has ever seen evolution at work? False. It has been documented in real time with a variety of animals for e.g. fish, flys etc etc. Again - educate yourself. This is not withstanding the very extensive fossil records (again creationist views that fossil records are not adequate is not true), as well as very substantial physiological evidence. hmm was going on to 4.) but Im bored.

      Fredster69 - 2011-05-16 14:29

      Brilliant, but the Atheists will still argue.

      LloydSix - 2011-05-16 15:10

      RUBBISH, wow, you can read that and think you have made a point? No one has seen the professors brain? That is the same as no one has ever seen god? It's not called faith - it's blind illogical faith.

      Irené - 2011-05-16 16:20

      Jeez, I thought these little anecdotes are only peddled to naive school children. I weep for humanity...

      bmpdragon - 2011-05-16 23:24

      Mr Nobody (I'm sure this is a song title), your little allegory is , well, silly. The first part, (where the Professor is questioning the issue of evil) is a well known theological conundrum and has been debated upon for a few thousand years (and the debate continues unabated today). The second part (where the student is questioning the Professor) is based upon the confusion/conflation between the general layperson definition of certain terms (light, dark, hot, cold, etc.), and physics usage of those same terms. Another famous example of this conflation is the term "theory". When a layperson hears, "theory", he/she assumes "supposition". When a good scientist hears "theory", he/she assumes "a coherent, non-contradictory set of explanations for a phenomenon that is supported by empirical and replicable data sets that may be falsified in the future". Hence, many creationists quickly use that sad and sorry retort: "oh, but the theory of **** (fill in the blank) is only a theory!" All this usually illustrates is the ignorance of the creationist about scientific terminology. In much the same way, your little story illuminates (rather brightly) your own ignorance about science, Mr Nobody...

      Zion - 2011-05-17 19:15

      Very funny indeed: or are we really creating a god to prove there is a god albeit by personal creation like in a dream world. Or do we go about looking for ways to create a god simply to prove what we have faith in is true? So we have the gift of the gab to create the god we want and need and the newly created god is merely a play on words. So we pray to semantics. Do we now create gods to win arguments. Now if we can and know we can create a god to suit our needs then why do we not eradicate Satan by the reverse methods or reverse engineering. Now there is a challenge come Sunday.

      Zion - 2011-05-17 19:32

      I agree with most of what you say. Just a point to differ. What exactly is the correct meaning of chaos? The word is commonly used to denote disorder. When disorder is analysed it too will be seen to follow certain laws and usually has emergent properties that have a highly ordered state. In a certain context I agree too with your interpretation of Chaos but will remember that chaos a situation or arrangement that does only seem to defy order. There is no chaos in the universe only that which we do not understand. A perception of a living breathing god is closer to "chaos" than what we are aware of hence chaos is in the mind only.

      Rangutan - 2012-01-06 06:10

      HAWKING SHOULD GO BACK TO KINDERGARTEN; HE MISSED SOMETHING IMPORTANT! (or see this video: http://youtu.be/ldHF6PFUukw)

  • Fluffy - 2011-05-16 13:32

    While I don't subcribe to religion Per se. It's kinda difficult to believe that something as complex as our conscienceness simply ceases to exist when we die.

      Justin - 2011-05-16 13:51

      When posed with a difficult to undersatnd problem, creating a solution that requires even more difficulty to understand is not very helpful. Usually explaining something involves simplifying it. To say "I can't understand how my mind works, there must be a God" is not only lazy, but extremely unhelpful...

      anna - 2011-05-16 13:51

      Precisely. Strange that a brilliant man like Hawking simply shuts the door on that concept.

      KPActivities - 2011-05-16 13:57

      Fluffy, Amen. If everything just ends when we die, why not put a gun to your head and get it over with?

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 14:21

      Its a bit counter intuitive...but one...What are you measuring our complex conscience to? In another universe we may in fact be simplistic. We are very bias to our selfs and its difficult to say our mind is amazing when we have not experienced the alternatives. second, do you remember what it was like before you were conceived? You conscience came from nothing...or failed to exist and then did exist. So logical to assume the same will happen in reverse.

      saburger - 2011-05-16 14:50

      Life is brain activity (that includes your conscience). If you are brain dead, you are dead.

      Bongza.GP - 2011-05-16 14:53

      Just like everything ends when we die, everything began when we were conceived.

      NuttyZA - 2011-05-16 19:20

      It's actually very easy to believe it fluffy... it's just that you don't want to believe it. Answer this, if someone has been brain damaged, and as such has lost their ability to function as they previously did i.e. there cognitive abilities are not what they were and they effectively a vegetable, does that mean their conciousness (soul?) has left the building?

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 13:05

      Fluffy, all the evidence we have points to the fact that it does.

      Zion - 2011-05-18 07:58

      How about the crude comparison: A dead dog and a dead human being. Both are relegated to the same status and hence the same. Both will turn to dust and not one will enjoy an advantage rising out of his/her/its former life.

  • Jan-Albert - 2011-05-16 13:34

    From rock/dust to an amazing human being such as Hawking, sans God - infathomable!!

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 13:56

      Which scientific theory proposes we came from rock?

      JB - 2011-05-16 14:34

      for the love of your non-existent god, educate yourself. Thank **** our ancestors didnt say: "a horseless carriage? infathomable!" "A flying bus??? Infathomable" "Heart transplant? Infathomable!" "The sun is the centre of the solar system? Infathomable" That last one got Gallileo put under house arrest for the rest of his life for sacrilege by small minded religious ****'s like you who could only stick their heads in the sand, wring their hands and cry "Infathomable!!! to the uncaring universe".

      Cornix - 2011-05-16 14:38

      Well, we come from matter, don't we?

      NuttyZA - 2011-05-16 19:41

      Jan-Albert... what has your comment got to do with the topic? We are discussing the existance of heaven, not the existance of a creator. I do not believe in heaven, however, I am qute prepared to accept that the possibly of a creator (I do not think there is but I am open to the idea)...

  • eugene smit - 2011-05-16 13:36

    The Bible had more technical science facts in it thousands of years ago already, now that hte understands the "most fondamental basics" he thinks theres no heaven? These science nuts should eventually realize that Nature, Science and God goes hand it hand, without the one the other wont make sense!

      eugene smit - 2011-05-16 13:40

      He once had a theorie: THe Laws of energy states that energy needs to come from something to transfer into something else, Hence it is proven that the universe did not always exist and that an a very powerfull source of envergy either dumb or smart energy created the universe and God aswell, But it is unlikely that it was a dumb energy because of the structure of the universe. So his Logic then said that the "Energy which created the universe" must of created the God aswel....Whats so hard to believe about a ALL CREATING NON ENDING GOD creating everything. The Bible tells us that the universe is just one of his inventions! Think about that..His power is testifyed by the power which he would need to posses to creat something like our universe!

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:05

      I've got a book that tells me Frodo and Sam went to Mordor to destroy the One Ring so that Sauron could not claim dominion over all the people of Middle Earth - sounds like my book has better stories than your book...

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:08

      "The Bible had more technical science facts in it thousands of years ago already" - I'm not sure which bible you are reading, but mine has absolutely NO mathematical equations in it, am I reading the wrong version?

      Ben - 2011-05-16 14:24

      @mbossenger... Not fair comparing them. Tolkin was schooled at a Oxford college and had a awesome imagination. The writers of the bible had sand and.. stuff. Hail Sauron

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 14:25

      There was a powerful force required to begin the universe. According to a book written by people of this earth God is a powerful force. Therefor God created the universe. What about the million other possible answers it could be? The problem with religion is making people content with not knowing the answers?

      Albo - 2011-05-16 14:30

      @mbossenger: You`re reading the 50BC version. Switch to the 200AD version. Get up to date FFS!!

      Stinkhout - 2011-05-16 17:03

      mbossenger, sure we cannot claim the Bible is a science manual but right from page one it explains creation in a very interesting way. If you and I wrote the equivalent story of creation today we would probably say light came after the sun etc but not so in the Bible. Light was created first or is it dark matter that facilitates light waves to propagate through space? If so, how did they know it back then when it was written?

      Stephen Berry - 2011-05-16 20:03

      Bible had no technical sience facts. Show me one technical science fact in the bible. The bible is full of contradictions. According to the bible the earth is flat with four corners. The earth stands still and the sun revolves around it, there is a rain canopy above the earth with doors and windows and so on and so on.

      mbossenger - 2011-05-17 09:04

      "right from page one it explains creation in a very interesting way." - you mean completely wrong? "Light was created first or is it dark matter that facilitates light waves to propagate through space" - So light was created without a source? And your statement about the medium to propogate the light is irrelevent to the argument.

      ruth.marais - 2012-01-06 23:31

      There is a God. God gave us all a brain to make choices in life. If you choose to not believe in Him, that is your choice. Without faith and loving God, there will be no happy ending. Reject God and He will reject you. Once you pass on to another life, it will be too late to repent. Miracles do happen! Give God a chance and you will see what you have never seen before. God is Love (real caring love) and gives us enough to know that He does exist!

  • tbone - 2011-05-16 13:43

    Nobody, the difference between a scientific and non-scientific approach to understanding the universe around us is BLIND faith and a constructive arguments based on fact and conclusions deducted from observation and reason. None of which any religion has. So what are you trying to say with your cut and past argument that is as old as the hills?

      eugene smit - 2011-05-16 13:51

      Rolf if you dont know your Bible its easy to say this aint it.....The Bible's them was not to explain to mankind how nature works but how to instruct and teach of their creator and his ways...Go more into the original texts and go have a look at the Hebrew meaning of some words it paints a totally different picture than our conservating watered down Kings James....

  • rantoftheday - 2011-05-16 13:51

    According to Belinda Carlisle, Heaven is a place on earth. This is a circular argument - science does not accept religious text as proof; and religion talks of faith which is immeasurable. No one is going to change their belief based on online forum comments.

      eugene smit - 2011-05-16 13:54

      If only people cann pull their heads out of their stubborness and believe like children again, the earth and meaning to life would be awsome! To figure out a puzzle u need all the pieces

      Chewbacca - 2011-05-16 14:10

      Yes, like Circles In The Sand, also by Belinda Carlisle

      rantoftheday - 2011-05-16 14:37

      Well spotted Chewie! Perhaps the answer is to pray to Belinda Carlisle

      Proefeet - 2011-05-16 16:07

      According to David Byrne (Talking Heads) heaven is a place where nothing ever happens. Not near to SA then.

  • thabiso.marumo - 2011-05-16 13:52

    Wasn't heaven used to refer to outer space, the universe or the sky, the Gods in all religions, angels and God were refered to have come from the heavens which is up above. People made heaven a myth an invisible place in the sky because they can't accept extraterrestrial as being their creators.

      eugene smit - 2011-05-16 13:59

      Thabiso, you know whats the strange part about your statement, The Bible tells us that "Fallen Angels" had children with the humans. And that there where giants before and after the floods as there where still other people scattered over the earth....so for all the conspiearacy theory guys the Bible supports this!

      Fredster69 - 2011-05-16 14:34

      WTF are you smoking?

      thabiso.marumo - 2011-05-16 14:57

      Fred whats your point?

  • cromagnon - 2011-05-16 13:54

    Well... in my opinion, Stephen Hawking saying God doesn't exist is equal to any of the other 7 billion people on earth saying so, so I dont really understand why this is newsworthy. You either have faith or you don't... Strange how all ancient cultures believed in the afterlife and spirits.

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:04

      because ancient human beings were not scientifically advanced enough to explain phenomena they did not understand, therefore the gods did it. It is the same as asking a 3 year old where electricity comes from. They will explain it the best they can with the limited knowledge they have. We(Modern day, educated man) have the insight to apply our knowledge. THERE IS NO GOD. I promise you! FACT. Religion is for the inadequately educated and indoctrinated. The rest of us have the freedom to be rational.

      KPActivities - 2011-05-16 14:13

      @ Modicum of Reason ,, what an idiotic remark, go and google "ancient rome and technology" you will feel less than a 3 year old, as for your last statement, we all just have to wait and see.

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:24

      @KPActivites. How does one feel less than a 3 year old?(I only speak English sorry). What about ancient rome and technology? Oh were you implying that by listing a specific scenario where one ancient civilization was using technology that this would solidify the argument of GOD vs. REASON? If so could you please elaborate on your comment.

      NuttyZA - 2011-05-16 21:17

      KPActivities - so you think the Ancient Roman gods are real then???

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:20

      Science explains how things work. It does not explain how things came to be. To paraphrase Lewis. Hawking's definition of "nothing" is the quantum-vacuum, whereas we Christians believe that God created that quantum-vacuum OUT OF nothing. Whether it is true or not, is irrelevant in this regard. What is immportant is that we get clarity on what everyone means by "nothing". It's an old trick, but still effective on people who don't deal with skilled rhetoric on a daily basis.

  • Pupuzela - 2011-05-16 14:00

    If you read 'Die Groot Gedagte" of Gideon Joubert, you will see that the universe is a planned affair, a 'put-up job' as Einstein referred to it. It didn't just happen, the science behind it is simply too incredible to be random. We as humans simply do not have the mental capability to comprehend God or Heaven, hence faith is required.

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:06

      haha, No it isn't. people please! It is absolute trash to conceive that "Oh I personally cannot explain everything therefore the flying spaghetti monster must have made it." Don't be an idiot. THINK

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:15

      All hail his noodly appendage

      Pupuzela - 2011-05-16 14:46

      Oh Yes, and don't mock him...

      JMan - 2011-05-16 17:20

      So Gideon Joubert has all the answers then...what he says goes? Your statemnet :"you will see that the universe is a planned affair"... no I won't see. Because its not. Joubert wrote a book about what he thinks...not what is.

  • Jamie - 2011-05-16 14:02

    I thought Stephen Hawking was only physically strained??!!

  • Creationist - 2011-05-16 14:04

    Lord God Almighty. I just want to honor You for who You are...the Great I AM. You are the creator of Heaven and Earth and your Holy Word is the same Yesterday, Today and Forevermore. It is our Hope. "Christ in us, the hope of Glory". I don't think I would be able to convince anyone on this this site who does not believe in You already, so I am not going to try....I did not come to know You through intelectual reason as this is contrary to the Spirit and the flesh does not understand the things of the Spirit. So, I am just going to give You some honor in this debate and then want to thank You, with my fellow Christians for You said "Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, nor has come into the heart of man, the things that You have prepared for those who love you". We cannot wait Father, thank you Jesus...Amen

      Pupuzela - 2011-05-16 14:43

      A sincere AMEN to that Brother/Sister!

      Lennox - 2011-05-16 14:51

      Amen!.........none so blind as them that don't want to see! I have been at the deathbed of two atheists who had the same beliefs as a lot of people commentating on this subject, however when faced with the crossover from life to death, realising they had a short time left on earth, they asked me to hold their hands and pray to God for them. You could see the fear in their eyes, a sense of knowing how wrong they were.

      Winston - 2011-05-16 16:27

      @ lennox. PLEASE!!! am I to believe that?? this is exactly the type of thing christians use! TRY TO SCARE PEOPLE INTO BELIEVING!!! that says alot about your religion, doesn't it??

      Winston - 2011-05-16 16:29

      Jesus doesn't save, SLAYER does!!! RAINING BLOOD,FROM A LACERATED SKY! BLEED ITS HORROR, CREATING MY STRUCTURE, NOW I SHALL REIGN IN BLOOD!!!

      Zion - 2011-05-17 19:46

      Creationist, I find your comment repugnant and in poor taste. I, by virtue of this forum am exposed to your lack of manners and hypocrisy. It is due to people like yourself that I prefer to remain what I am - an atheist. You will go to any lengths, even indecency, to proclaim your non existent God all mighty. Imagine the furore on this site if I opened up a comment such as: Oh Satan, lord of the flies, I bow unto thee and no other fool which does not exist blah, blah, blah. Your type makes me sick.

  • Marcell - 2011-05-16 14:05

    And he think he is clever. Poor soul!

      Winston - 2011-05-16 16:19

      And I take it you are all-knowing, then? Please enlighten us poor ignorant souls...

  • Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:09

    I was really hoping that this country had at least some clever people in it, looking at the comments on this post I can only assert that most of you are blind, morons that eat all the trash that religion feeds you. It's ok, you're all too stupid to even consider the rational alternatives. I can appreciate that your views are not mainstream in the grand scheme of things otherwise we'd all be F*****. just for the record, there is a reason why religion has been excluded from the public education system in most first world countries...Because it is BullSh*t!

      eugene smit - 2011-05-16 14:47

      If religion is so Bs why does the UNITED NATIONS build theyre look and desire on theological believes! The strongest orginization in the world believes in the occultbut you dont believe in your God, Do you know the Bible talks about the "Council of nations" in the latter days????

      Lennox - 2011-05-16 14:58

      @ Modicum of Reason....a sincere question,no offence intended, why did you give yourself that name....Modicum meaning "small quantity", just curious.

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 15:16

      Why don't you go play with your baboon and ape ancestors in the Zoo. They also believe there is no God - they only believe what is around them in this present moment in time. The problem with that is that the whole of time is not just a few centuries of idiotic child-like Darwinian suppositions - e.g. man looks like ape, therefore man came from ape. So what if we share some genetics with apes - we are still worlds apart. Gold shares the same electrons and protons that other elements are made of yet you don't find people spending thousands of rands on lead jewellery do you? If I followed your logic I will go to Truworths and buy a 1ct cubic zirconia "diamond" for R60 000 becuase - hell- its the same as a 1ct diamond from American Swiss.

      bmpdragon - 2011-05-16 23:02

      Yamadhoota: you seriously need to read some real books on particle physics, cell biology, genetics, information theory, bio-informatics, etc. I am astounded by your rather pitiful analogies. Subatomic particles are just that: particles. The way these particles are arranged (and the number of them) makes up the particular element (which can then be said to "contain a code or recipe"). The way these various elements combine is also a code or recipe for a particular molecule. In the same way, DNA is a very particular combination of molecules: it is the order of these molecules that contains the code or recipe for making a particular species and individual (the genotype gives rise to the phenotype). While gold may have the same electrons as lead, and chimpanzees may have the same four nucleotide molecules as humans, it is the way in which the electrons and nucleotides are ordered that makes the difference — although apparently not for you...

  • Ben - 2011-05-16 14:13

    The holy trinity: Sagan, Hawking, Dawkins.

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:15

      Amen!

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:25

      I could think of worse people to have on my side..

      Ben - 2011-05-16 14:26

      and their son they gave us, Prof Brian Cox.

      jean.dutoit - 2011-05-16 14:31

      Which break-away sect of the church of science are you following? Repent and know that the only true science trinity is that of: Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. Science fiction, that is. :D

      Fredster69 - 2011-05-16 14:36

      ..and the unholy trinity. Me, myself and I

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:54

      Brian Cox - physicist and member of D:Ream. Truely a man of many talents :)

      Ben - 2011-05-16 15:49

      See!! ...walk on water...Pffft. Try playing keyboard in a 80's band and working at the LHC.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:23

      I thought there were four of them: Dennet, Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris? A drunk, a coward and two overrated egoes. When Dawkins mans up and responds to calls FROM HIS OWN FOLLOWERS to debate William Craig, we'll take him seriously again. At least Hitchens and Harris had the guts, even though they had their intestines handed to them.

  • george - 2011-05-16 14:20

    Scientists that believed in God. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) Einstein is probably the best known and most highly revered scientist of the twentieth century, and is associated with major revolutions in our thinking about time, gravity, and the conversion of matter to energy (E=mc2). He recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Come to think of it, if God does not exist who created the first atom?

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 14:30

      A quote, verbatim from the man himself - "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this, but have expressed it clearly." *Albert Einstein* MORONS that do not research properly irritate me even more than religious people! RESEARCH IS KEY!!!

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:34

      You do realise the god Einstein referred to was NOT the christian god, don't you?

      jean.dutoit - 2011-05-16 14:49

      Another quote by Albert Einstein, then in his 50's: "I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws." Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298-2,00.html#ixzz1MWFYKmRX

      yamadhoota - 2011-05-16 15:23

      Einstein, eisenhower, leonardo, newton...any scientist worth his salt knew there was more to complex creation than just random origin. Mordicum - you are as mad as they come !

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 15:34

      what about Hawkins yama? He is respected as someone whose minds has been paralleled to Einsteine. You can not say because a scientist does not believes in god he is an idiot or what ever you are going on about. BTW Einsteinian was most likely not an atheist as he never said there is no god, there is no way to prove that, but he was not religious and even if he were he would NEVER accept Christ. I hope i don't have to explain why...."hint"...it has something to do with his penis.

      rammstein.f4n - 2011-05-16 15:59

      Einstein was a Spinozist.

      Stephen Berry - 2011-05-16 20:10

      I have no problem with you believing in god. I just cant believe that anyone with sane logic reasoning can believe in the bible. It is full of contradictions.

  • Stirer - 2011-05-16 14:28

    the only thing that makes one person a christian, another a Jew, yet another a Buddist and another Islamist, is .... their parents. They are told from birth that their parents' chosen religion is paramount, and they take it in faith that what their parents tell them is correct, so that becomes their own chosen religion. Not one religion is wrong, nor is any religion right. Why doesn't everyone just let others believe in what they want to believe - whatever gives them faith. What gives anyone the right to judge another person on their religious beliefs?

      Margaret2 - 2011-05-16 15:02

      No, one is not a Christian because one's parents are, and Christianity is actually not a religion. Religions are about people thinking that they have to, and are capable of, doing enough to please God. However, no number of good works can cancel out the underlying sinful nature. That requires a saviour who does everything that is necessary, ie Jesus Christ. And many people come to Christ from religions, and atheism eg CS Lewis.

      ruth.marais - 2012-01-06 23:45

      This debate is not about religion, it is about the creator that created earth and humans. Satan was an angel of God and wanted to be God. Satan also had a choice and thus all the evil from Satan. God will stop Satan in his time!

  • Vitruvian Man - 2011-05-16 14:35

    This is what happens when you try to build a puzzle without a box. You should have build the puzzle with the face up Mr Hawkins. The picture doesn't change just because the clock ran out and you didn't solve the puzzle.

  • silverflash - 2011-05-16 14:41

    Hawking is a tool !! The creation debate has been done and resolved .yawn..Result you have have a i.q of 0 not to realize that there is a GOD

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 14:56

      "The creation debate has been done and resolved" - it has, only I suspect the outcome is different to what you believe it to be...

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 15:09

      Oh Well now that explains it, you hear that people the argument has been resolved unanimously and we are all idiots. Guess I'll go to church now then. But before I do could you explain how to prove the existence of a fairytale? I'd love to hear this?

      Ben - 2011-05-16 15:51

      Debate is done? Damn...didnt get that memo...Who won?

      GLY - 2011-05-16 16:43

      Modicum of reason please could you prove the existance of love?

  • silverflash - 2011-05-16 15:01

    Just look at the Hawking's pic, If only he could realize that God cant be measured with science ! or searched for via science ! God is all around , open your eyes and see for yourself , He gives us the choice to believe or not ! And i Believe !!!!!

      mbossenger - 2011-05-16 15:11

      If god is "ll around and all we need to do is open our eyes", then he is most certainly detectable and measurable via science, like anything else that can be seen with our eyes.

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 15:12

      You have been brainwashed silverfish. The church gave you the choice between obvious bullsh*t and burning for eternity so that you will keep coming back and paying 10% of your income into that offering tray.

      Pupuzela - 2011-05-16 15:52

      No Modicum, the choice is a simple one, either you believe or you don't. It remains your own personal choice though, and that is the power of religion, because you have been afforded the choice. You don't earn or buy salvation, you simply choose to accept it. Simple as that.

      JMan - 2011-05-16 16:51

      Well at least he's trying..and if you've really studied his work and the reasoning behhind his claim (which I doubt you have) you would see that he has alot more on his side than you with your 'you just have to believe or burn' attitude... open my eyes? Where? show me? oh right. you can't.

      JMan - 2011-05-16 16:56

      @ Pupuzela. This I can live with. You choose to believe or not. What I can;t live with though, is (most) religious people trying to push things to believe down my throat with threats of eternal suffering if I don't...and all this based on their choice.....nothing more. Please.

      NuttyZA - 2011-05-16 21:28

      Pupuzela - Salvation from what exactly? Life? The Greek vision of the Underworld, Hades (a fiery Pit, stolen by the Christians to represent their hell)???? I am quite happy being alive thank you, and one day when I day I won't be aware of anything anyway.. do you really think that one day you are going to die and live forever?????? do you realise how long forever is? Try taking the age of the universe, +- 14 Billion years... that is 14 000 000 000 years and then multiply that by infinity... god, could you imagine how awful forever would actually be... no thanks, you can keep it!

  • Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 15:08

    I think the reason I hate debating with the religious is they get so dam defensive. Namely because their debate comes down to faith and they get really aggressive if you say their logic is flawed. Scientist on the other hand LOVE to debate. Its like a competition with them and you battle each other when you put out a flaw in their logic they make a counterpoint. It is continuously debating and almost always we reach a point of consensus, not necessary agreement but we understand the other point of view so well that you could see yourself adapting it. I have never had that satisfaction with a religious debate because it always hits the wall of I don’t see why I need to believe and they believe. A friend and I once had a debate with these born agains who wanted to convert my sinning ways to follow god….the one girl started crying when we finally agreed but only on the condition we could join Islam, a especially noble step considering my friend was Jewish. .Some Christians take things so personally. Just for the record I know this does not apply to all believer and non-believers. Some atheists are illogical and generally quite dumb and some Christians are very eloquent in their arguments but if you step on my personal opinions I feel I have the right to retaliate, and I know the same applies if I step on your personal beliefs. Just make sure you can validate your retaliation.

      silverflash - 2011-05-16 15:16

      Well Atheist like you who is waiting for a "divine intervention" normally fail to even notice when God is trying to reveal himself to you , My friend my advice to you is if u truthfully wanna see and experience God you will !

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 15:16

      Agreed...

      Modicum of Reason - 2011-05-16 15:29

      And I was agreeing with Oryx not you Silverfish you biggoted idiot.

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 15:39

      Who said i was atheist? Perhaps i should of clarified but i was referring to the Christian/Muslim/Jewish god. Ask me if there is a god/higher power my answer is simple I don't know, there is no proof either way. "I do not know if there is a God or what he is.....but i know what he isn't"

      Looter - 2011-05-16 16:23

      IMO, most religious folk are so aggressive and always pity one if you dont believe their ways because they are afraid. If they will be honest with themselves, Im sure they have had a thought of uncertainty about death and that you could just be no more. That IMO is a sign of acceptance that what we see might be all we get. The belief system is totally flawed as i dont need a god to justify my existence! I am grateful that i am alive and that the opportunity arose for life to develop and for me to be a part of this great cycle of so many life forms! I see the beauty and am amazed with the world around me even with out a so called gods presence! I was born christian, just to be educated and decide that it nothing more than a book that teaches values, though they are good. I guess my biggest issue in religion is that they believe in punishment for eternity after death. If i was born to live free and make my own choices then why will i get punished for doing so, and then where is the freedom? so am i a slave to a master because he had created me but has never shown himself? these are just some of the factors that drove me away from religion! I never got any answers in church, just crazy people hitting each other with flags because some claimed god made them do it, although i can see there are a few screws loose and no one says anything because they all accept its god or either they too embarrassed to approach....and i speak from personal experiences!

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 16:31

      @looter. I agree...the one thing i always enjoy is the the two questions? one: If there is no god what is the point of your life cause you are not working towards anything. two:Where do you get your morals from if not from the bible/god. The answer to the both is simple. As far as i know, this is all i have so i better not waste it. I want to leave fond memories about me and leave some sort of impact for later generations. I want to better my self (for me) and improve my off springs chance of success. There is no second chances just this one go. If i do something stupid i will pay for that and will need to work to correct it. There will be good times and bad times but i will be carried by my will power. That idea guides me. Do I need god to justify my morals?

      Capt. Murphy - 2011-05-16 16:36

      silverfish, I can relate, I've been waiting my whole life for "divine intervention" or just some sort of proof, and then all of a sudden there it was! Last night whilst having supper I saw it in my plate, the way the meatballs lay'd on top of the noodles, it couldn't be clearer, how could I have been so blind all this time? My eyes were opened and then I felt his warm love as I was touched by his noodley appendage, or it might have just been the tabasco... All hail the sauciness that is FSM!

      Margaret2 - 2011-05-16 16:38

      @Looter - no-one is born a Christian, ine is BORN AGAIN (or, from above) a Christian.

      Capt. Murphy - 2011-05-16 16:57

      @Margaret2, I think he meant to say he was born into a christian household / family, or rather as most of us indoctrinated into christianity. a Born again christian is truly the most feeble minded of all earth's creatures, as even with newly gained insight into the world and its workings it still chooses an irrational path of misinformation and mental slavery...

      mbossenger - 2011-05-17 08:56

      @Oryx_ZA - the very last place you should get your morals from is the bible.

      Margaret2 - 2011-05-17 11:08

      @ Capt Murphy - if what you say about born-again Christians is true, then there have been a very large number of feeble-minded scientists!

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:25

      You don't get satisfaction because when you are faced with even a glimmer of sense, you turn to your pink unicorns and red herrings.

  • anna - 2011-05-16 15:39

    After all the scientific breakthroughs and evolutions, incredible discoveries in technology, it amazes me how primitive mankind still is. The proof can be seen in most of these comments .. sadly.

      Grunk - 2011-05-16 16:42

      Please enlighten us therefore with your obviously extremely evolved and intelligent thoughts on the subject.

      Looter - 2011-05-16 17:39

      because other have different views does not make them primitive. Because you chose one path and other wont follow does not mean they have been influenced by Satan either, and yes, because of the breakthroughs we have made in the past century, i have made my conclusion. I thirst for knowledge and the more we explore the more i want to know! Enough blood has been spilt over religion, enough sacrifice dont you think! Just for though, if corruption can occur so freely in our society, who says it cant occur in religious politics! Dont be fooled, priests and all the rest must also survive like every one of us. the bible seems to try be a answer for what we have in front of us today, but for me the fun lies in the mystery! I hope i did not offend anyone, just speaking my mind.

  • Ivan - 2011-05-16 15:41

    Funny how people WANTs there to be a GOD, no matter what. Because of their own fears! If faith is the link between MAN and GOD, And not proof, then faith only started with Abraham and the likes of Moses. Because thats where Judaism/Christianity started. What was before that then? Circumstance? Or only the BELIEF that there were something bigger and better. Making it the creator in one's own mind. Religion is just in the mind. Thus Stephen Hawking is correct.

      GLY - 2011-05-16 16:47

      Ivan What about the now proved miracles the God performed through Moses. Such as the parting of the Red sea which has now been proven possible through a mighty wind.

      NuttyZA - 2011-05-16 21:37

      GLY... "it has been proven possible" is not actually the same as "It has been proven to have happened"...

      mbossenger - 2011-05-17 08:55

      @GLY If the Red Sea was parted by wind then it's not a miracle, is it?

  • qwasi - 2011-05-16 16:03

    @Cornix - Scientists do not need to 'physically see something to believe it'. As humans we need some way of distiguishing truth from untruth, and the scientific method is the only tool we have for doing this. 'Faith' can be used by anyone to justify beliefs in Christianity, Islam, Buddism and astrology. Having faith does not make any of these beliefs true and should not be accepted as a valid argument for anything. For a god to require us to abandon the rational abilities he supposedly blessed us with and rely solely on faith for entry into an afterlife is an absurd notion.

      Winston - 2011-05-16 16:13

      @ QWASI. I agree 110%. Very well said!

      RationalistPabi - 2011-05-16 17:41

      @qwasi: well said. it is sad though because a lot 'adults' will still fail to grasp this clear basic logic. they would still see the one 'true' religion they were conveniently born into as their after-life insurance.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:25

      Well said, if it weren't utter nonsense.

  • Winston - 2011-05-16 16:09

    I would much rather believe Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins before I believe any priest or minister etc! I have read some comments, and it is blatantly clear that most Christians posting here now, dont know much about science... Insulting him because he is in a wheelchair, WILL NOT PROVE THAT GOD OR HEAVEN EXISTS!!! atleast he and others like him are trying to find answers! they dont rely on a book that was written ages ago! By the way, he does not blame god for being in a wheelchair... He is one of the greatest thinkers of our time... THINKING - Something that most Christians find very inconvenient...

  • Ben - 2011-05-16 16:12

    Go to youtube and search for a clip called "Science saved my soul". Awesome!!

  • JMan - 2011-05-16 16:14

    Finally. Someone with credentials has the balls to come out and state the obvious.

  • Cornix - 2011-05-16 16:18

    Religionists can't prove to atheists that God exists, neither can atheists prove that God doesn't exist. No scientist, creationist, evolutionist, atheist or religionist can say he/she knows everything there is to know, so I guess we will have to keep trying to get answers or just wait and see.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:26

      How DOES one prove the most properly basic fact?

  • philiplerm - 2011-05-16 16:28

    In order to believe in heaven and God, you have to believe in the opposite, making you the largest number in 2 religions... Think about it. ;-)

      bmpdragon - 2011-05-16 22:44

      Ah, democracy: the tyranny of the majority! ;-)

  • di - 2011-05-16 16:33

    Mr Hawking is too intelligent for his own good. If I was about to die (he is 79)it's not a chance I would be prepared to take. There is a 50% chance he's wrong. VERY high odds indeed. May God have mercy on you Mr Hawking.

      Irené - 2011-05-16 16:41

      So you believe, only because you want the odds to count in your favour? "If there is a god, and i dont believe in him, i will burn. If there isnt- then no harm done" Wow, you sold me. pretty infantile reasoning to base your beliefs about life and the universe on that alone!!!! BTW hes 69, not 79, it says so in the article- but that once again proves our point- most Xtians do not READ and Comprehend.

      Cornix - 2011-05-16 16:45

      I agree. No scientist can say he/she knows enough and has the prove that God doesn't exist. Mr Hawking is no different.

      JMan - 2011-05-16 16:48

      Well no priest or whatever can say he/she knows enough and has the prove that God does exist. You are no different. Just saying...it goes both ways.

      Cornix - 2011-05-16 16:57

      @JMan, exactly, as I mentioned in my comment a little higher up.

      Oryx_ZA - 2011-05-16 17:13

      SO......he should believe in God just because if he doesn't he MAY go to hell. Ya that sounds reasonable. I call on you to name me your ruler...if you do not i will ensure that you spend eternity writing down the lines "this is logic don't make no sense-snap" Can you really take the risk?

      bmpdragon - 2011-05-16 22:43

      Actually Di, the odds are in Steven Hawking's favour (as would be expected of one the most eminent minds of the last century). The reasoning is as follows: are there gods or aren't there (50% chance either way); are these gods forgiving or aren't they (50% chance either way); if these gods aren't forgiving, are they indifferent or vengeful (50% chance either way); if they are vengeful what is the severity of the punishment (ranging from reincarnation to Hell-fire). So you see that in the end, the chances are pretty good that Hawkings will not suffer any ill fate at all. You are jumping to a single conclusion based upon one type of belief system that through chance, political expedience and warfare has become the dominant religion in the world. Not great odds in your favour either, I'm afraid!

      Grunk - 2011-05-17 16:42

      Di, Your odds are no where near correct because don't forget that unless you are a True Believer (take your pick of the many, many religions each of which has their own and sole path to Heaven) and the odds are more likely to be 50/1 than 50/50

  • GLY - 2011-05-16 16:49

    If Hawking is right, earth is the closest that he will come to Heaven. If Christians are right then the earth is the closest that they will get to hell. Remember Pascal's wager.

  • silverflash - 2011-05-16 16:54

    Well numb friend .. iam not being hostile to your opinion ..Just stating the obvious .

  • RationalistPabi - 2011-05-16 17:02

    i'd say by about age 10 that should be pretty clear to everyone!! no imaginary friends, angels, santa, tooth fairy, magic, superstition, although some might believe some or all of these, it does not make them true. talking snake, donkey, bush, etc should decisively known to be friction just like you would any other religion/god. No need to be a scientist to figure this one out i'm afraid.

  • sardonicus - 2011-05-16 17:18

    There ain't no heaven and there ain't no hell, except the one you're in and you know too well... Take the blinkers of your eyes, the power is in your hand. Stop waiting for your ticket to the promise land.

  • Stinkhout - 2011-05-16 17:50

    I read in the small print that scientists are still frantically searching for the additional 7 dimensions required to complete the unification theory (cooking the books in accountant speak). Perhaps heaven is hidden in one or more of those 7 dimensions they are still searching for (scientifically speaking).

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:29

      I'm still waiting for flogiston and dark energy to show up somewhere. If all else fails, change the definition.

  • trueblu&real - 2011-05-16 20:00

    When I first began enquiring into the rational basis for Christian belief and seeking God on the subject, He soon took me through an experience, which perfectly illustrates the position of the believer in the world. The following event is an actual account of an experience I went through, during the time in which I was seeking an understanding of the relation between faith and reason: One evening after leaving a friend’s house late at night, the road on which I was driving led me to a four-way intersection. At the intersection it was necessary for me to turn right so that I could follow the road home over the mountain. The traffic light was red and I came to a halt in the middle lane of the three lanes going in my direction. Ahead of me and across the intersection to the right side of the road I noticed that a road block had been set up. There was a caravan for testing blood alcohol levels and a few flashing lights. I was not in the least bit perturbed as I had not been drinking at all. In fact, I barely took notice of the road block. However, what did suddenly make me uneasy was the fact that I was in the middle lane, when, possibly, I should have been in the far right lane in order to swing right at the intersection and head over the mountain. I thought that maybe the middle lane was only for vehicles going straight over the intersection and not also a lane in which motorists could turn right. My unease came because I had noticed that a police vehicle had pulled up behind me. I saw the blue lights flashing in my rear view mirror and thought that I did not want to cross over a lane with the police right behind me. While the traffic light was still red, I decided to inch over into the right hand lane so that I would at least be 100% sure that I was not violating any traffic law. There was space for me to make this cross-over into the adjacent lane. As soon as the light turned green I simply turned right and headed off towards the mountain. The very next moment I had the police in hot pursuit of me with sirens going and frantically directing me to pull over. Both policemen in the vehicle were convinced that I had changed lanes in order to avoid going through the roadblock. It is not hard to imagine how ridiculous my true reasons sounded in the face of the overwhelming evidence, which to any reasonable policeman, would clearly seem to indicate that I was indeed attempting to avoid being tested for driving under the influence of alcohol. I surrendered to their demands to go back and be tested because I couldn’t really blame them for believing what they did, even though I knew that they were 100% incorrect in their interpretation of the evidence. (The evidence: - late night; roadblock ahead; change lanes; speed off in different direction ? conclusion: must be drunk and avoiding test). So it is with the believer in the world. The evidence may seem to be against him/her, does that mean that he/she should just “plead guilty”? Should I have just said, “Well, all the evidence certainly looks as though I am over the limit and trying to avoid the roadblock. OK, take me in and lock me up, I’m guilty of drunk driving”? Obviously not. It is therefore possible to know that you know that something is true, even though, to someone else, all the evidence contradicts your claim. Empirical evidence is not univocal but always open to interpretation. God is a personal God who reveals Himself personally, within the heart/spirit, to those who seek him. This is outside the realm of physical sense perception and a much surer ground for knowledge. Who knows what is in the heart of a person except the person him/herself? As the Bible says, our spirits witness with God’s spirit that we are children of God. This is internal conviction and cannot be demonstrated in a lab. When it comes to proof for God’s existence, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. That is how God works.

      rantoftheday - 2011-05-17 08:10

      That is the most irrational anecdote I have ever read. I would have had more respect for it if you had said, "I was hammered, saw a roadblock in the distance and prayed to the Almighty that I wouldn't get stopped. The police stopped the person behind me and the person in front of me, but not me. This proves the power of prayer." You say God reveals himself to those who seek him, is it not possible that you so badly want to believe in a higher power that you believe that he exists? Many people label those who have a relationship with a higher power as lunatics. I don't because many people claim to receive love and comfort from a higher power, but just because you believe it doesn't mean that it's true. Saying that internal conviction can't be measured in a lab is exactly why science scoffs at religion.

      trueblu&real - 2011-05-17 13:39

      Rantoftheday, why is it irrational to you? you don't give reasons. Why would fabricating a story in which i was tanked be more convincing to you? are you more persuaded by fictional stories? Futhermore, this experience did come in answer to prayer. The point is that the cops were rational but wrong. Hawkings is rational (most of the time) but still wrong. Science has its limits. The human being is not mind (reason/intellect)and body (physical senses) ONLY but a spirit (conscience/intuition) aswell. Reason has its limits and senses can be deceiving. I'm also not sure where you got the idea that science "scoffs" at religion. This is simply wrong. What you mean to say is that atheist scientists like Dawkins scoff at religion. "just because i believe somthing doesn't mean its true". That is correct and applies equally to atheism. However, what i have been trying to show is that my belief is based on spiritual discernment.

  • JMM - 2011-05-16 20:25

    Oh ok. Thanks for the info Stephen Hawking. Please tell me why and how did you become the font of wisdom and the definitive source of knowledge about matters religious?

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 11:01

      With no evidence for a supernatural claim, Hawking is as authoritave on the subject as anyone on the planet. Actually given that he understands our universe more than any of us on this page, he has more to add to the subject than we do.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:30

      There are loads of evidence for supernatural claims, not least of which is the Grand Miracle of Christianity. You should really go and find out what you mean by "evidence" before you make yourself look like a tool.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 21:00

      //There are loads of evidence for supernatural claims// I would love you to list links to science journals validating your claims. I really mean this, bring your evidence, I'm ready to listen. //not least of which is the Grand Miracle of Christianity.// //You should really go and find out what you mean by "evidence" before you make yourself look like a tool.// Said the pot to the kettle. Your personal viewpoint on xtianity is evidence? If it's not published in respectable science journal, it is not evidence. You don't get your own facts, you don't get your own definition of evidence and the way you feel about it has no bearing on the subject, whatsoever.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 21:12

      I strongly urge you to reconsider what you believe the definition of "evidence" is. Seriously. Has the existence of Darwin been proved through peer-reviewed research?

      Justin.A - 2011-05-18 15:04

      //Has the existence of Darwin been proved through peer-reviewed research?// Oh nice try! "Charles Darwin Existed" is not a supernatural claim. Again my personal viewpoint on the existence/non existence of Charles Darwin has no bearing on the matter. There is a standard of evidence that is required to prove a person existed, and since historians accept this I do not have the qualification or resources to disprove this. Human beings have been recorded to exist for millenia. This is not a claim outside our regular scope of existence. A supernatural claim requires a standard of evidence to validate this claim, history is not the tool for this. Philosophy is not the tool for this. The tool for this is science, and in every instance the supernatural has failed, dismally. Not only this but natural phenomena regularly explain the supernatural. "Charles Darwin could fly" is a supernatural claim. It goes against all known laws of physics. As with "Charles Darwin rose from the dead". This goes against medical science and the related discaplines have authority to investigate. "Jesus rose from the dead" is treated the same skepticism. //I strongly urge you to reconsider what you believe the definition of "evidence" is.// If its good enough for 300+ years of scientific enquiry, its good enough for me. Thanks. Finally I wait with baited breath for your evidence of the supernatural. Given that these comments eventually fail themselves, perhaps submit a "MyNews24" with this.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-18 15:11

      Oh and Charles Darwin is buried in Westminser Abbey.

  • GeorgeSA - 2011-05-16 20:51

    The problem is that to know for sure, you have to die. On the other hand, never say never.

  • Justin.A - 2011-05-17 07:59

    Would any of the fundies here like to explain that if "teh science cannot answer" somehow your personal experience and a 2000 year old book of MYTHS automatically means heaven isn't a myth? //a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.// Define your heaven with the precision that gravity is defined and proven and maybe we will have a reason to listen to you.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 16:31

      Probablility theory does not work like that.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 20:54

      Ancient myths aren't a standard of evidence.

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 21:12

      What about modern myths? has someone been able to prove the existence of the multiverse?

      Justin.A - 2011-05-18 14:45

      //What about modern myths? has someone been able to prove the existence of the multiverse?// How is the multiverse a modern myth? It's a scientific hypothesis. No it's not proven, however while it's backed up by theoretical physics, inflationary theory (which matches the observational data obtained from the CMB) also predicts multiple universes. A lot of people, have done, and continue to do a lot of research on the subject. This follows the scientific method and peer review process. Again, if the multiverse exists it will be proven by research and the scientific method. If it is an incorrect model, it will be disproven by research and the scientific method. You are most welcome to call it a myth, but again your opinion on the matter has no bearing on the subject. Whatsoever.

      Tania - 2012-01-06 07:53

      There is a website, Creation Ministries. They have around 7000 articles (if you go to their Q&A section). It might just give you some food for thought.

  • frederick777 - 2011-05-17 09:31

    OVER FIVE MILLION REASONS WHY I WILL NOT BE VOTING ANC There are over five million reasons why I will not be voting for the African National Congress (ANC) in the upcoming elections on 18 May 2011: 1. Over one million babies have been killed by abortion in South Africa - officially, legally, often with tax payers' money - since the ANC legalized abortion-on-demand, 1 February 1997. "Deliver those who are drawn toward death. And hold back those stumbling to the slaughter." Proverbs 24:11 2. Over 500,000 people have been murdered in South Africa since 1994 - under the ANC government - yet the ANC has steadfastly refused to consider re-instating the death penalty for murder. Nor have they been willing to put the matter to a referendum. "Bloodshed pollutes the land and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it." Numbers 35:33 3. Over one million women and children have been raped in the 17 years of ANC rule (and that is just using the reported rape statistics) - while pornography has been legalised. Reportedly, less than 7% of reported rapes result in convictions. "Why do people commit crimes so readily? Because crime is not punished quickly enough." Ecclesiastes 8:11 4. The ANC is soft on the criminals and hard on the victims of crime. Rather than fight crime effectively, the ANC have worked to disarm the potential victims of crime, denying firearm licenses to tens of thousands of law abiding citizens, and claiming that self-defence is not a legitimate reason for owning a firearm! Rather than support community initiatives to fight crime, the ANC have frustrated communities by demanding that security barriers be removed from crime-afflicted suburbs. "Stop doing wrong, learn to do right! Seek justice." Isaiah 1:16-17 5. The ANC's Ministry of Education has evidenced a generally hostile attitude to Christianity, insensitivity to the concerns of parents and prejudice against the Bible. Kadar Asmal's anti-Christian policies and the unworkable Outcomes Based Education curriculum 2005, dumbed-down education and turned government schools into recruitment centres for radical homosexual groups. "My people are destroyed from lack of knowledge." Hosea 4:6 6. The ANC's Affirmative Action, Black Economic Empowerment and blind support for Mugabe's racist and tyrannical policies have chased away investors and cost the South African economy millions of jobs. According to the JSE, the net worth of South Africa over the first 10 years of ANC rule shrunk by over 30%. And the Rand under the ANC has plummeted from R2 to the US dollar to R7 to $1. "Do not use dishonest standards...Use honest scales and honest weights...I am the Lord your God." Leviticus 19:35-36 7. Rates and taxes are higher and government services are lower. Despite increased rates and taxes the filthy, litter strewn, graffiti-vandalised communities testify to the incompetence of government. "You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting..." Daniel 5:27 8. Corruption has flourished under the ANC to such an extent that the ANC is being referred to in the streets as the Abortion, Nepotism and Corruption party. "They claim to know God but by their actions they deny Him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good." Titus 1:16 9. The endless propaganda and pornographic programmes on state TV - which is supported by compulsory "licences". "Who will rise up for Me against the wicked? Who will take a stand for Me against evildoers?" Psalm 94:16 10. The arrogance of so many in the ANC and the arbitrary manner in which they ride roughshod over the concerns and freedoms of others - such as the Minister of Health refusing to meet over a thousand concerned doctors; and how their ICASA has attempted to close down many Christian and community radio stations in South Africa. "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people." Proverbs 14:34 The Bible instructs us to "select capable men from all the people - men who fear God, trustworthy men who hate dishonest gain - and appoint them as officials..." Exodus 18:21 Evidently ANC candidates fail to qualify on Biblical grounds. Mobilise Your Congregation to Think Before They Ink! The South African Biblical Issues Voters' Guide aims to inform Christians about the different political parties' track record and policies on pro-life, pro-family, and free enterprise issues.

      Irené - 2011-05-17 11:17

      I'm not going to waste my time to reply on all your points, rather just the first- obviously you are anti-abortion, but tell me, what is better, a fetus being removed (right or wrong), before they can experience all the suffering and abuse that life will offer? Since the parents obviously dont want the kid, I think its better to end the suffering before it begins. How many of those aborted fetuses wouldnt have been born with HIV or fetal alcohol syndrome? But i forget your all loving, all powerful god wants each defective fetus to live out its miserable life, hey? Abortion is not legal because of the ANC,but because we live in the 21st century - it is a womans right to decide if she is capable of having and loving a child. Rather that than unwanted, abused children on the streets, who turn into juvenile delinquents, end up in prisons and cost more of the taxpayers money. Oh and, if you dont want to watch late night porn, dont. But there is nothing criminal about two people engaging in consensual sex- this is a secular country, why should we only be allowed to watch bible approved tv? if we dont practice Xtianity?? thats my 2 cents

      Ben - 2011-05-17 13:16

      I will fight as long as I live to keep state and church separate.. We've seen what happens when leaders do things with god on their side.. Bush, Botha, Taliban...the list goes on and on and on....

      Vaal Donkie - 2011-05-17 21:13

      Tell you what. I'll support abortion if you support the death penalty.

  • Zion - 2011-05-17 13:02

    We live in a physical world where there is no place for another dimension. But if somebody has been to heaven and back and can show the ticket then I will reconsider. We are living in 2011 and it is time the human race lost its archaic perceptions of a supernatural world just out of reach and accept the physical world around them. God and heaven is like an ATM.Just pray, slip your card in and out come the rewards. Steal your brothers card, slip it in and out comes buggerall because god does not like thieves.

  • Cornix - 2011-05-17 14:36

    Stephen Hawking's books are science fiction.

      Winston - 2011-05-17 15:07

      Maybe if you actually read them, you would learn something! So, you have read all his books, and decided that they are all Science Fiction? LOL!!!

      Cornix - 2011-05-17 15:33

      Stephen Hawking proposes a theory he calls spontaneous creation and that gravity is the creating force behind universes and mass. Huh? Is he contradicting the laws of physics? If there is no mass, then the practical assertion of gravity seems without merit, especially in creating mass. No mass, no gravitational force. Sounds like a James Bond story to me.

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 20:52

      //Is he contradicting the laws of physics? If there is no mass, then the practical assertion of gravity seems without merit, especially in creating mass. No mass, no gravitational force. // I'm just going to go ahead and assume that you neither have the qualifications or experience of Hawking. Just because you make stuff up doesn't mean Hawking does.

  • rushi.nortje - 2011-05-17 15:02

    May the Lord forgive you...

      Winston - 2011-05-17 15:11

      For what exactly?? thinking?? I would think that god would appreciate open and honest enquiry... But from what I have read in the bible, I doubt it! The god of the bible is a bloodthirsty racist!!!

      Justin.A - 2011-05-17 20:50

      Lord Shiva?

  • cromagnon - 2011-05-17 15:29

    @Modicum of Reason - reading your posts make me think you are a bit full of yourself and maybe even an idiot. You may have read a few books but I assure you here are people on this forum with pretty advanced degrees in science. Also, promising me God doesnt exist hints towards you just wanting to say it. I never said he existed. And someone saying heaven doesnt exist is newsworthy? Come on! Atheism is as old as the mountains! millions of people believe heaven doesn't exist!

  • John - 2012-01-05 23:51

    Atheist: Mao Tse Tung, and the Chinese Communist Party; 200 Million Political Assassinations 200 Million Killed by Ignorance 200 Million Killed by Incompetence 200 Million Killed by Negligence 2,4 Billion Killed by Abortion ( 1,2 Billion population, women 600 Million, 2 generations = 1,2 million, 1 child Law, no contraceptives provided, 2 abortions per woman, 2,4 Billion Killed by Abortion ). A Genocide of over 3 Billion. Atheist: Stalin, and the Russian Communist Party 100 Million Political Assassinations 100 Million Killed by Ignorance 100 Million Killed by Incompetence 100 Million Killed by Negligence 300 Million Killed by Abortion ( 300 Million population, women 150 Million, 2 generations = 300 Million, no contraceptives provided, 1 abortions per woman, 300 Million Killed by Abortion ). A Genocide of over 700 Million. Atheist: Hitler, and the NAZI Party: 56 Million in 2 World Ward Pol Pot, and Cambodia Communist Party: 5 Million Thabo Mbeki, and ANC 5 Million by denial of medication to aids sufferers Repeat for East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tadzhik, Kirghistan, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cuba, Venezuela, Tanzania, Mozambique, Zimbabwe. And the mentally challenged Socialist Parties, which define themselves as Anti God. Ammunition is what the ATHEISTS use to Genocide 6 Billion. Just in the Last 100 Years.