Blinded with 'science'

[Guest]

Of course chaos can produce order, if energy is added. Just take a look at the evolution of life!

How about providing an example of something we can actually observe?

I Saw It On The TV

And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. Genesis 1:24-25

Dino's Walking And Talking

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Genesis 1:26

And Riding On The Choo-Choo Train

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. Genesis 1:27-28

Together Through Evaluation Land In Juvenile Joy And Fellowship

And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. Genesis 1:30-31

So It Must Be True It Must Be Fact

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. Genesis 2:1-2

I Saw It On The TV

[DC10]

Blinded with 'science'

God didn't create the universe, Stephen Hawking says in his latest book, "A Grand Design."

Rather, the renowned physicist writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."

I think what Professor Hawking actually wrote was

"It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going."

Maybe it's not necessary, but that says nothing about His existence or otherwise.

Never let the facts get in the way of a good headline, especially when you're trying to sell books, or serialisations of books.

[Guest shiloh357]

Rather, the renowned physicist writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."

That is irrational. It is not possible to be both creator and creature at the same time.

[MorningGlory]

I'm a little astounded that a brilliant man like Hawking would come forth with this inept observation....anyone with a high school diploma should know that chaos cannot produce order OR physical laws. The article is correct....nothing cannot produce something. There has to be a creator in order for that to happen.

Of course chaos can produce order, if energy is added. Just take a look at the evolution of life!

Totally incorrect; life came about by a process of chemicals and elements being brought together. The exact opposite of chaos, which is total random disarray with no order apparent. Of course those things were brought together to form life by the Creator.

[DC10]

Rather, the renowned physicist writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing."

That is irrational. It is not possible to be both creator and creature at the same time.

I'm not sure there is anything rational about string theory. Or sub-atomic particles, for that matter. If gravity is a weak force, how come it hurts to fall over?

[nebula]

If gravity is a weak force, how come it hurts to fall over?

I hope you are joking.

It is considered weak because it takes a humongous amount of mass for it's affects to be noticed.

[DC10]

If gravity is a weak force, how come it hurts to fall over?

I hope you are joking.

It is considered weak because it takes a humongous amount of mass for it's affects to be noticed.

Actually, I didn't know that, so thanks - what's more, it makes sense. How are you on string theory?

(btw - I hope you're not suggesting I have - or I am - a humongous amount of mass).

[nebula]

If gravity is a weak force, how come it hurts to fall over?

I hope you are joking.

It is considered weak because it takes a humongous amount of mass for it's affects to be noticed.

Actually, I didn't know that, so thanks - what's more, it makes sense. How are you on string theory?

(btw - I hope you're not suggesting I have - or I am - a humongous amount of mass).

How am I on string theory? Well . . . ummm . . . I know the theory exists. And I sort-of get the idea of what they say about it. . . . That's about it.

If you are asking if I agree or disagree with it - What do I know? I've never worked on the experiments.

But the subatomic particles do exist - muons, leptons, etc. There's enough out there to verify that at least. How they operate is a whole different ball of wax, though.

And no, I'm not suggesting you area humongous amount of mass. That would be the planet gravity pulls you towards.

[Fez]

In a way I guess chaos is part of God's design. Just one that we don't understand.

Take this definition for instance.

Without chaos there cannot be movement, and without movement there cannot be change.

Things change all the time right?

And God is control of everything, right?

[DC10]

If gravity is a weak force, how come it hurts to fall over?

I hope you are joking.

It is considered weak because it takes a humongous amount of mass for it's affects to be noticed.

Actually, I didn't know that, so thanks - what's more, it makes sense. How are you on string theory?

(btw - I hope you're not suggesting I have - or I am - a humongous amount of mass).

How am I on string theory? Well . . . ummm . . . I know the theory exists. And I sort-of get the idea of what they say about it. . . . That's about it.

If you are asking if I agree or disagree with it - What do I know? I've never worked on the experiments.

But the subatomic particles do exist - muons, leptons, etc. There's enough out there to verify that at least. How they operate is a whole different ball of wax, though.

And no, I'm not suggesting you area humongous amount of mass. That would be the planet gravity pulls you towards.

My reason for raising string theory was a remark I saw associated with Professor Hawkins comments. I 'm afraid that I didn't keep the article as it's not an area that interests me greatly (probably because I don't understand it), but, from memory, Hawkins came to his conclusion having read "some elegant mathematics" in "an area of string theory".

Hawkins is certainly a deliberately provocative writer, but I suspect he chooses his words well. The counter-arguement might therefore need to rest on an understanding of the "elegant mathematics", rather than logic or rhetoric. Which counts me out completely - I'll stick to ToE.