Because I’m a really big fan of him and I’ve read ABHOT, and TGD.
So then you agree with Hawkins that there is no god here? Or are you trying to ignore that Hawkins said the opposite of what you are trying to show in this discussion?
Lobo:
No it would not be evidence for a created universe for two reasons: you are assuming a creator would have a desire to place statistical unlikelihood’s into a universe, and if your Knights actually did exist, say, in Peru, and were discovered tomorrow, random chance is still a simpler and more likely expectation then intentional divine creation.
That’s both inaccurate and a false dilemma.
I think that Hawking’s explanation for the existence of the universe is actually worse than positing a god/creator.
Hawkings also said “philosophy is dead” and that signs now explains what philosophy was supposed to, but I think that’s also wrong.
Statuslly thinking I believe that the best explanation for the universe you and inhabit is as follows:
If we posit a time in the future where it is possible to create a computer simulation so good that it is indistinguishable from reality, and that inhabitants of the future will be interested in playing such simulations, then, statistically there are many simulations but only one we reality. Therefore, we most likely inhabit a simulation, have no access to reality and therefore cannot profitably contemplate it’s nature.
That seems to be the most likely explanation. We are in a created, complete with a creator God. There might even be an Afterlife, especially if you are not an NPC.
Posting frm an iPhone is fucking hard
Do you honestly think that you understand something about the physics that Hawking does not? Do you honestly believe you’ve spotted a weakness that completely escaped him?
If you don’t understand something Hawking has said (and you are not alone), try asking somebody who has a decent graps of it (that person is not me, by the way). Just declaring that you’ve spotted a weakness is ludicrous.
Do tell us more about you wizard theory, though. Who made the wizard, and where is he now?
Let’s not forget that Scylla is a fucking idiot. Aside from actual stupidity, where he isn’t able to reason worth a shit, he’s also horribly ignorant. For instance, Scylla thinks that science never says I don’t know:
Yes, Lobo, but this time he’s right. >.>
I suppose a dipshit clock is right twice a day. 
That’s such a textbook example of the classical fallacy of the argument from authority that it’s self refuting.
But yeah, that’s why I was cringing. Still, unlike you, I’m not going to automatically believe something that doesn’t seem to make sense just because it comes from an authority.
Yeah, and this is like a fucking synopsis of Chapter 2 of TGD, you fucking moron. You’re debating theories you haven’t bothered to read. Why is this so ficking shocking to you? Do you think science is generally right?
Science’s track record for getting the answer right has sucked donkey dick.
The only thing that it has going for it is that it sucks a little bit less than anything else. But no, science has not been particularly good at admitting ignorance
What wizard theory?
I think you are mistaken on what the argument from authority means, as we are talking about how Hawkins looks at the physics involved, he is a relevant authority, when the authority is an expert of something else rather than the issue at hand then it is a fallacy.
Lol. Keep fucking that chicken, dipshit. KFTC.
…And now I remember what you mean by that. :V
Yet strangely, it appears that I have read the books and am familiar with material that is bring discussed, and you have not.
My understanding of the argument from authority fallacy is that it occurs when you give credence to an argument based on who is making it rather than by it’s own merits.
Yes they do, Otto. They just don’t understand it. [/afcw]
That’s not really a counterargument to my statement. If you think I am mistaken you should argue why. If you simply make snide comments absent content than I think your posts are dismissible.
No, it’s just Occam’s Razor. What’s more likely, that Scylla doesn’t understand what Hawking is saying, or that Scyllas has such a phenomenal mind that he was able to spot a mistake in Hawking’s hypothesis despite a total lack of training in physics?
If you disputed a medical doctor’s diagnosis without any understanding of medical science, it would not be an appeal to authority to assume that you were the one was making a mistake.
Note that I did not say I agreed or disagreed with Hawking’s hypotheis. Unlike you, I can admit that I don’t understand it well enough to render an informed opinion about it. I do know that it’s highly unlkely that you’ve spotted any kind of basic scientific weakness in it, though. If it “doesn’t seem to make sense” to you, then why don’t you try having somebody explain it to you before you assume you’re some kind of genius who spotted a flaw.
And not for nothing, but don’t you think the Bible is authoritative?