Hawking Says Universe Created Itself

[K9Buck]

There is absolutely no evidence that the universe is spreading outward.

What?

Using the 100-inch Hooker Telescope at Mount Wilson Observatory, Dr. Edwin Hubble has studied many spiral nebulae. He has discovered they are moving away from us at a rapid pace. This is strong evidence of an expanding universe. He has further determined that the farther the nebula, the faster it moves away.
Universe is Expanding​

Redshift is not evidence that the universe is expanding.

It is evidence that everything is moving away from us and for that to happen the universe must be expanding. A consequence of an expanding universe is that the universe had a beginning. This makes certain people very uncomfortable.

I used to think that too when I was a little kid. That's what we were taught in elementary school. When I got older I put much deeper thought into it before coming to the logical conclusion that the universe is infinite and eternal.

The universe being infinite and eternal. Isn't that much like coming across a fire not knowing how it started and believing it to be infinite and eternal?

No. Your analogy isn't analogous.

 

[Freewill]

Very likely..Based on the laws of chemistry and physics it most certainly did.

If you don't believe this then i ask who or what created god? It is so much more simple to explain things with laws of science compared to figuring out how a super being developed out of nothing.

Laws of science = billions or even tens of billions of years for such processes to slowly come together.

God popped out of nothing! =

For God to be the cause of creation doesn't mean that God has to be defined as being created by anyone. To use the old story, you find a watch, you know a man made it, who created the man isn't relative.

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which has the attributes of being eternal and unchanging. A characteristic which is wholly outside the laws of nature.

Using that logic, the whole universe is out of the laws of nature, in regards to the beginning.

Wrong.

Something had to give the initial push. The belief that the universe gave itself the initial push couldn't be more illogical.

Maybe you should read all the responses I was commenting on then you will see my context.

 

[Freewill]

What?

Using the 100-inch Hooker Telescope at Mount Wilson Observatory, Dr. Edwin Hubble has studied many spiral nebulae. He has discovered they are moving away from us at a rapid pace. This is strong evidence of an expanding universe. He has further determined that the farther the nebula, the faster it moves away.
Universe is Expanding​

Redshift is not evidence that the universe is expanding.

It is evidence that everything is moving away from us and for that to happen the universe must be expanding. A consequence of an expanding universe is that the universe had a beginning. This makes certain people very uncomfortable.

I used to think that too when I was a little kid. That's what we were taught in elementary school. When I got older I put much deeper thought into it before coming to the logical conclusion that the universe is infinite and eternal.

The universe being infinite and eternal. Isn't that much like coming across a fire not knowing how it started and believing it to be infinite and eternal?

No. Your analogy isn't analogous.

OK, then how about this, answer one simple question, what do every event that has ever happened have in common? And is quite frankly the basis of science.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Very likely..Based on the laws of chemistry and physics it most certainly did.

If you don't believe this then i ask who or what created god? It is so much more simple to explain things with laws of science compared to figuring out how a super being developed out of nothing.

Laws of science = billions or even tens of billions of years for such processes to slowly come together.

God popped out of nothing! =

For God to be the cause of creation doesn't mean that God has to be defined as being created by anyone. To use the old story, you find a watch, you know a man made it, who created the man isn't relative.

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which has the attributes of being eternal and unchanging. A characteristic which is wholly outside the laws of nature.

Using that logic, the whole universe is out of the laws of nature, in regards to the beginning.

Wrong.

Something had to give the initial push. The belief that the universe gave itself the initial push couldn't be more illogical.

"Something had to give the initial push"

Says you. Unfortunately, you have not a shred of evidence that this is true, or that all of reality even had a beginning.

 

[K9Buck]

Redshift is not evidence that the universe is expanding.

It is evidence that everything is moving away from us and for that to happen the universe must be expanding. A consequence of an expanding universe is that the universe had a beginning. This makes certain people very uncomfortable.

I used to think that too when I was a little kid. That's what we were taught in elementary school. When I got older I put much deeper thought into it before coming to the logical conclusion that the universe is infinite and eternal.

The universe being infinite and eternal. Isn't that much like coming across a fire not knowing how it started and believing it to be infinite and eternal?

No. Your analogy isn't analogous.

OK, then how about this, answer one simple question, what do every event that has ever happened have in common? And is quite frankly the basis of science.

A cause?

 

[cnm]

Cause and effect is the foundation upon which science was built.

So it take it neither are you going to link to the 'scientific law of cause and effect'.

 

[K9Buck]

Very likely..Based on the laws of chemistry and physics it most certainly did.

If you don't believe this then i ask who or what created god? It is so much more simple to explain things with laws of science compared to figuring out how a super being developed out of nothing.

Laws of science = billions or even tens of billions of years for such processes to slowly come together.

God popped out of nothing! =

For God to be the cause of creation doesn't mean that God has to be defined as being created by anyone. To use the old story, you find a watch, you know a man made it, who created the man isn't relative.

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which has the attributes of being eternal and unchanging. A characteristic which is wholly outside the laws of nature.

Using that logic, the whole universe is out of the laws of nature, in regards to the beginning.

Wrong.

Something had to give the initial push. The belief that the universe gave itself the initial push couldn't be more illogical.

"Something had to give the initial push"

Says you. Unfortunately, you have not a shred of evidence that this is true, or that all of reality even had a beginning.

So causation doesn't exist in the universe?

 

[Freewill]

It is evidence that everything is moving away from us and for that to happen the universe must be expanding. A consequence of an expanding universe is that the universe had a beginning. This makes certain people very uncomfortable.

I used to think that too when I was a little kid. That's what we were taught in elementary school. When I got older I put much deeper thought into it before coming to the logical conclusion that the universe is infinite and eternal.

The universe being infinite and eternal. Isn't that much like coming across a fire not knowing how it started and believing it to be infinite and eternal?

No. Your analogy isn't analogous.

OK, then how about this, answer one simple question, what do every event that has ever happened have in common? And is quite frankly the basis of science.

A cause?

Exactly!

 

[cnm]

If matter cannot be created, how did God do it?

It is possible for matter to be created in a closed system without violating the conservation of energy. See inflation theory.

You've missed the point here.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For God to be the cause of creation doesn't mean that God has to be defined as being created by anyone. To use the old story, you find a watch, you know a man made it, who created the man isn't relative.

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which has the attributes of being eternal and unchanging. A characteristic which is wholly outside the laws of nature.

Using that logic, the whole universe is out of the laws of nature, in regards to the beginning.

Wrong.

Something had to give the initial push. The belief that the universe gave itself the initial push couldn't be more illogical.

"Something had to give the initial push"

Says you. Unfortunately, you have not a shred of evidence that this is true, or that all of reality even had a beginning.

So causation doesn't exist in the universe?

I think you mean determinism. And yes, it seems determinism exists in our observable universe. However, our observable universe may not be all there is. Also, there is no reason to believe all of reality even had a beginning. While I cannot assert with certainty that a magical sky wizard does not exist, I also cannot say that what we observe means he certainly does exist.

 

[K9Buck]

I used to think that too when I was a little kid. That's what we were taught in elementary school. When I got older I put much deeper thought into it before coming to the logical conclusion that the universe is infinite and eternal.

The universe being infinite and eternal. Isn't that much like coming across a fire not knowing how it started and believing it to be infinite and eternal?

No. Your analogy isn't analogous.

OK, then how about this, answer one simple question, what do every event that has ever happened have in common? And is quite frankly the basis of science.

A cause?

Exactly!

My belief is that we have a creator that, I presume, has always existed. Many will say that's impossible. But here's the rub. Something had to be able to exist or come into existence without that initial causation. My guess and my belief is that there is a creator that got it all started. If one scoffs at that then, as I've stated repeatedly, then we're left with the theory that the universe just came out of nowhere. The other issue that atheists have is how life came to be. The atheist would tell you that the universe has always existed or that it created itself or perhaps some other theory. Let's get past that for a moment. How then did life come into existence? Are we to believe that life too has, somehow, always existed? This is where we're delving into the ABG theories (Anything but God theories) wherein hardened atheists go off the proverbial table of logic. The only logical conclusion is that there IS a creator who created our universe and who created life. The atheists offer nothing credible.

 

[K9Buck]

I cannot assert with certainty that a magical sky wizard does not exist...

You don't believe that a higher intelligence could exist somewhere that could have created us? You seem to be of the belief that mankind can or will one day be able to create life, so, why couldn't a higher intellect?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I cannot assert with certainty that a magical sky wizard does not exist...

You don't believe that a higher intelligence could exist somewhere that could have created us? You seem to be of the belief that mankind can or will one day be able to create life, so, why couldn't a higher intellect?

I just said I can't rule it out.

 

[K9Buck]

I cannot assert with certainty that a magical sky wizard does not exist...

You don't believe that a higher intelligence could exist somewhere that could have created us? You seem to be of the belief that mankind can or will one day be able to create life, so, why couldn't a higher intellect?

I just said I can't rule it out.

Yea, and did so mockingly. Guys like you are constantly mocking the possibility that a higher intelligence created us. It's narrow-minded, arrogant and, frankly, ignorant.

 

[cnm]

Inflation theory is the leading cosmological model which explains how space and time were created through a quantum tunneling event. An event which occurred per the laws of quantum mechanics and conservation of energy. Which means those laws were in place before space and time which means those laws were the first cause but still doesn't address the source or first cause of those laws. The only solution to that dilemma is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Or that we lack knowledge.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Very likely..Based on the laws of chemistry and physics it most certainly did.

If you don't believe this then i ask who or what created god? It is so much more simple to explain things with laws of science compared to figuring out how a super being developed out of nothing.

Laws of science = billions or even tens of billions of years for such processes to slowly come together.

God popped out of nothing! =

Again, backwards. Science actually says you can't make something from nothing. Thermal dynamics and all. So, nothing banging against nothing creates nothing. So says science.
And to further muddy your pond, science tells us that there is no such thing as random. Nothing happens by chance.
On the other hand, God had physics, dark matter (that we/science just found out existed, even though it has been there taunting us for billions of years.) and friction. God spoke, the Holy Spirit moved and the result was light.
Light. How do you think light works, Mr Science himself? In fact, since the advent of the laser, science has made a new discovery about light. That has actually been the case since there was light, but, you know, science also grinds exceedingly slowly.

Laws of science. Einstein= there are 4 dimensions.
Opps. String theory. M theory.
New Laws of science. Hawking= there are 10 dimensions.
Opps. Dimension theory.
Future Laws of science: Kaku= An infinite # of dimensions, and 1 God that created them.
Science is catching up to the Creator. Bout time. < (get it?)

 

[cnm]

The only logical conclusion is that there IS a creator who created our universe and who created life.

Three cheers for the god of gaps.

 

[The Irish Ram]

said; "One can't prove that God doesn't exist, but science makes God unnecessary

^Satan could not have said it any better......
Science has nothing to do with the necessity of God. It is our souls that require His attention.

 

[Peach]

Hawking theory is:
gravity supposedly can pull matter together from fine dust into nuggets, clumps, large conglomerates, nebulae, planetesimals, planets, stars, galaxies, galactic clusters, and superclusters.
________________________________________________
Where does the dust from nuggets, and the nuggets come from? How were they created? The atheist's dilemma is explaining how something came from from a void.

 

[Peach]

`
The article, from a "creationist" web site, is commenting on Hawking's book, The Grand Design, in which Hawking postulates; "that invoking God is not necessary to explain the origins of the universe, and that the Big Bang is a consequence of the laws of physics alone. In response to criticism, Hawking has said; "One can't prove that God doesn't exist, but science makes God unnecessary."

Those who take the bible literally, will object to that of course. They have no use for such things as science anyways. As creationists are all "faith based", argumentation in regards to science is totally lost on them. Hawking does not state an absolute in his book but offers instead, a mathematical and scientifically sound explanation of a "possible" alternative to the creationist concept.

While using matter obviously CREATED; Hawking always is confounded by his strict atheism, its a tough religion y'all have