All ideas welcome
>>72621310
God does not enter in the equation.
If nothing has been proven, then the answer is just unknown.
And for now, we just don't know everything.
Watch this and learn.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JiyrRbYNm0Q
If everything needs a cause, then god needs a cause too
If god doesn't need a cause, then the statement that "everything needs a cause" is already false
>>72621429
Yet we are not absolutely agnostic of the circumstances. Example, we do know that from nothing nothing comes.
>>72621310
God does exist. However, don't stop talking to atheists and listen to them. All opinions have value. If you have the truth, it will only strengthen your faith.
>>72621310
The universe is flat
>>72621534
stephen hawking is a fucking leftist cuntbag.
>>72621310
seeking advice from /pol/ ahaha ....just go on youtube and write " Universe from nothing" and enjoy :)
If your belief in God is simply "the creator of the Universe" but do not posit that he has ever interacted with humans or cares at all about humans and is simply the creation force of the universe then you are essentially an atheist.
It's one thing to say that the clockmaker God exists, that set the universe in motion eons ago and we simply happened, that's a perfectly plausible idea of God. It's an entire other thing to say the God of the Bible who created us specifically in his image and loves all of us and cares what we do with our penises exists. That's retard shit.
>>72621310
I'm under the same opinion as the OP
T'is not conjecture this regard and I guard this stance of purity without punity
>>72621310
I'll never rule out the possibility of some intelligent entity creating the universe, but to think that we could possibly comprehend that being or know its nature, or to believe that this being looks just like us and has a particular interest in this species of mostly hairless apes is just ridiculous.
I believe in a transcendance force that lights the match and created all the physical equations.
I don't believe in your god as represented by your bible and all the shits written in that book though.
>>72621310
Depends on how we define God. If there was a first thing to exist, I like to call that God. if there is no first thing (always something existing before something else), then I call anything and everything that has already existed God.
By my definition, God exists (assuming that either something existed before everything else, or there is no such object, and these are the only possibilities).
I see absolutely no reason why "God," has to be the God in the Bible, and I believe that humans just made it up.
>>72621651
He's one of the most intelligent people on the planet when it comes to theoretical physics
>>72621534
>>72621970
Intelligent people can arrive at dumb conclusions.
What Hawking is basically saying here is that because the Universe has no distinct beginning "point", it did not begin to exist, which is like saying that because a car did not have a distinct initial point of acceleration (can always sub divide time into smaller units) the car never began to move.
Clearly this is a dumb conclusion.
god could exist but he isnt fucking jesus or allah
>>72622187
>calls him dumb
>uses a fucking car analogy
>>72622298
not an argument desu
>>72622187
>which is like saying that because a car did not have a distinct initial point of acceleration. wich sugests that the car was allways moving at that speed.
That's the way i understand hawking reasoning.
>>72622201
do you live near Carthage
I want to go to Tunisia just to see Carthage
>>72622834
That doesn't make his reasoning any more reasonable. Just the opposite, else we must conclude that any car currently in motion has forever been in motion, and at the same rate of motion as when it was last observed.
>>72621536
Everything but God needs a cause.
God is the cause of everything.
>>72621310
Elders Ukraine
>>72624015
so how can you prove that god, the biblical god have no cause
>>72621310
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_RwcGzGurc
http://www.anu.edu.au/news/all-news/experiment-confirms-quantum-theory-weirdness
I think we are in a Matrix.
>Wake up, Neo.
>The Matrix has you.
>>72624233
I can't prove it, but I just gave you its valid definition.
You can't prove it doesn't exist neither. Hence the concept of faith.
>>72621561
but what do you mean by "nothing?"
>>72624650
well i can say my "cheprolione"
hace no cause and create the universe.
You can't prove it doesn't exist neither
>>72625042
You just used another word for God. That's totally valid, but it's only semantics.
>>72624656
Interesting question.
Rather than answer, I'd turn it around and ask what you would consider "the entire Universe"?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJmT15fDJ5Y
>>72621536
A transcendent force does not need to abide by the laws of nature
>>72621310
Haha we all know the universe was created by a hot chilli burito, you silly goose OP.
>>72621726
>cares what we do with our penises
Why is this seen as a silly/laughable idea? If we had a maker wouldn't it follow that he would have the best idea about how we should use our junk?
>>72625322
or a fantasy
anyway
how can you false god?
>>72627270
That's the thing, maybe if God is real is possible that he didn't made us. What i'm trying to say is that Life might be a predictable outcome out of the laws of Nature that he put in place, but that doesn't make life itself (Or Humans for that matter) the endgame of his creation. We might be just another thing wondering around this universe, a.k.a not a special snowflake.
>>72628227
You make the creation of the universe sound as tedious as breaking wind, what a horrifying thought, that dimensions and realities are just a byproduct of some unthinkably powerful force beyond.
>>72628227
a few notes
>What i'm trying to say is that Life might be a predictable outcome out of the laws of Nature that he put in place, but that doesn't make life itself (Or Humans for that matter) the endgame of his creation
Sure. Time is still ticking on, things are still being done.
>What i'm trying to say is that Life might be a predictable outcome out of the laws of Nature that he put in place, but that doesn't make life itself (Or Humans for that matter) the endgame of his creation
But this in particular doesn't jive with how unique our position really is. The simple relation between our planet's scale, moon, and relative distances between it, us, and the sun, are pretty damn precise, and that is one of a variety of factors that we're coming to understand as vitally important for cabon based lifeforms - wherein there really aren't any facsimiles really possible within our Universe.
So we're clear, don't confuse this with the argument that if the Universe was any other way the physics might support silicon based life. It is that the best data we have about our existing Universe is that under any possible conditions, no other forms of life carbon would develop beyond a most basic state.
We are absolutely a special snowflake in this vastness, for despite the expanse, the conditions on Earth are yet still remarkable. It is not in the least bit unreasonable to conclude that design as intentional, IF we are already going to concede an intelligent first cause.
tl;dr we can be something short of the endgame, but no less important in the whole of the design.
