Keep in mind it was also early in the morning for the guy calling you a genius...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Primitive Alien Life May Exist, Stephen Hawking Says

Well lookie here!...

A top scientist can freely say something with no evidence whatsoever and is NOT discredited and shunned by the community...

But then again, he didn't mention the dreaded "G" word, so he's welcomed with open arms...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Big Bang vs. ID...

The reality is that we do not know, nor do we (currently) have the capability of knowing what set the universe in motion in the first place. Either theory begs the question 'well, where did the initial material/being come from in the first place?'

We can argue these theories until we are blue in the face, but let's face a basic fact. We have no proof of the origin of the universe, period. All of these arguements, though fun, are simply intellectual masturbation.

I tire of this melodramatic b.s. that you firmly embrace because it supports your unsubstantiated "victimhood" paranoia pretenses.

Name me some scientists who have been "shunned by the community" for believing in God.

One of the things I quoted earlier (which got ignored) is how a LOT of the scientists actually believe in God.

ID is not taught with evolution because ID FAILS the scientific standard.
It lacks independent proof. Its ONLY means of "support" is to attack other competing theories. That's not how "science" substantiates THEORIES.

Maybe I should just switch terminology and talk about the "religious agenda" in our schools. Religious people want to "indoctrinate" our kids into believing in God, no matter what the person at home actually believes.
Is THAT the type of propagandic terminology I have to use to get through?

I believe the movie has the details...Isn't that the whole point of it?...

When did I say otherwise?...

So does saying "Alien life may well exist in a primitive form somewhere in our corner of the galaxy", which is what Stephen Hawking did...

So does saying "Alien life may well exist in a primitive form somewhere in our corner of the galaxy", which is what Stephen Hawking did...

And a good way to "substantiate a theory" is to say "Alien life may well exist in a primitive form somewhere in our corner of the galaxy", which is what Stephen Hawking did?...

My original post clearly points that the POSSIBILITY should be mentioned...

Which is the EXACT same as Hawking mentioning the POSSIBILITY of "Alien life existing in a primitive form somewhere in our corner of the galaxy."

And the EXACT SAME amount of evidence has been shown for both...

__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd

Yeah.
And earlier there was a post that ADDRESSED THE MOVIE'S DETAILS.
But I guess we can just ignore the falsehoods already demonstrated and just blindly repeat what other people say...


If you can show me where "alien life" is accepted in the scientific community as a THEORY, and TAUGHT as a theory, THEN you have a point.
Until then, you have one man voicing an opinion.
Which is also what the ID folk are doing.

And neither are being censored.


What Hawking said wasn't a theory.
I see nobody treating it as a theory.

Are you objecting to people opening their mouth and uttering statements, like the ID people are doing, without reprisals, just like the ID folk?

Or does this still revolve around imagined persecution of the ID folk?


If you have a "possibility" convention, then it should be mentioned.
If we are talking about THEORIES, then no. ID should not be mentioned when it is just a "possibility" and not a theory with evidence and proof.

When it comes to a science class, you teach the facts. Real theories.
You don't teach theories, and then throw in a "possibility" which has no evidence just to make the christians feel good.

We don't do that for other "possibilities".
All you've got here is that Hawking SAID something, which is exactly what the ID folk can do. They can SAY things to the public.


And they should be treated in exactly the same way.

1) Fox News repeats it? Yes.
Unless you're about to tell me that Fox News censors itself when it comes to statements from ID people...

2) Science classes teach it? No.

3) Scientists censored because they state "possibilities"? No.

Everything is consistent here, except you still have this misplaced paranoia that everybody is out to get the christians.
< end sarcasm >

And #4...
* Can I expect that religion will start preaching "evolution" as at least a "possibility"?
Naw. Didn't think so...