Michio Kaku: God Created the Universe

[Hollie]

Nonsense. The various disciplines of science are not “worldviews”, they are explorations of the natural world through evidence and examination of the processes within the scientific method.

They're worldviews because it's atheist science or fake science. They made wrong assumptions, used evidence to fit their theory and eliminated their competition. The Earth isn't 4.6 B years old nor the universe 13.7 B years old. Besides, the ages keep getting longer. I can't wait for the James Webb telescope to discover more untruths of the atheist scientists.

Your slogans are right out of the biblical literalist / YEC'ist handbook. I'm delighted to inform you that biological organisms evolve, we do, in fact, live in a heliocentric planetary system and the earth is in fact, Not Flat.

Are the charlatans at AIG supposed to be the end result of biblical literalism? In that, there should be no question as to the authenticity of the Bible, its provenance, its authorship-- it should supernaturally resist every attempt to change it. It should be immune to any and all tampering, It should gel not only with itself, but with the greater reality which is replete with evidence. If early humans could understand a "global flood" and parting of the Seas, then they could also understand a heliocentric solar system and the fact that stars are far away and life on earth has evolved for billions of years.

Yet the bibles purposely outline a creation that flies in the face of the evidence. Which is not surprising since, as a man-made book which is limited to the knowledge of the men who wrote it, it displays precisely the level of knowledge that would be available to the people in whose time it was written.

Other than the miracles, and some philosophical ideas (which were not wholly unique; for instance, Confucius coined the Golden Rule 500 years before Jesus allegedly did so), there's absolutely nothing unique in the Bibles. It's just got a lot of conflicting fables to it because it was written by many different people over many hundreds of years.

I said nothing of the kind. You must mix it up with the things that run inside your cuckoo brain.

On the first day, God created the space, time, universe, earth, and the EMS or light. That explains how space and time came into being while you cannot explain how space and time came into existence due to invisible particles. Thus, it sounds like you and the atheists are in the flat earth club. Besides, Copernicus was a Christian and believed in creation when he came up with heliocentricity. He challenged Pope Gregory and the bishops of what they were teaching. It's like today's creation scientists challenge the powers that be in secular or atheist science. God also explains how the universe and everything in it came to exist today.

Your science went wrong the very first microsecond of invisible particles. You cannot explain, so all you do is complain. That gets tiring and boring very fast, so just put your tail between your legs and go back to the drawing board.

You can hurl all the conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated with by the fundamentalist ministries but to insist the planet is 6,000 years old and a literal rendering of the genesis fable is true, well, that's really concerning.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

 

[james bond]

You can hurl all the conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated with by the fundamentalist ministries but to insist the planet is 6,000 years old and a literal rendering of the genesis fable is true, well, that's really concerning.

Not indoctrination, but just what I read and compared after reading and believing in evolution -- evolution.berkeley.edu. I notice you do not answer my questions because you do not have the answers. Just "beliefs" in things that secular scientists made up. You believe in natural philosophy which is essentially BS because it's not observational, testable nor falsifiable. It's part of your worldview.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Forgive me if someone has already noted the Harper's article:


1. " …according to various calculations, if the values of some of the fundamental parameters of our universe were a little larger or a little smaller, life could not have arisen.

2. For example, if the nuclear force were a few percentage points stronger than it actually is, then all the hydrogen atoms in the infant universe would have fused with other hydrogen atoms to make helium, and there would be no hydrogen left. No hydrogen means no water.
Although we are far from certain about what conditions are necessary for life, most biologists believe that water is necessary.

4. On the other hand, if the nuclear force were substantially weaker than what it actually is, then the complex atoms needed for biology could not hold together.

5. As another example, if the relationship between the strengths of the gravitational force and the electromagnetic force were not close to what it is, then the cosmos would not harbor any stars that explode and spew out life-supporting chemical elements into space or any other stars that form planets. Both kinds of stars are required for the emergence of life.

6. The strengths of the basic forces and certain other fundamental parameters in our universe appear to be “fine-tuned” to allow the existence of life. The recognition of this fine tuning led British physicist Brandon Carter to articulate what he called the anthropic principle, which states that the universe must have the parameters it does because we are here to observe it. Actually, the word anthropic, from the Greek for “man,” is a misnomer: if these fundamental parameters were much different from what they are, it is not only human beings who would not exist.No life of any kind would exist."
The Accidental Universe | Harper's Magazine


" …the great question, of course, is why these fundamental parameters happen to lie within the range needed for life. Does the universe care about life? Intelligent design is one answer. Indeed, a fair number of theologians, philosophers, and even some scientists have used fine-tuning and the anthropic principle as evidence of the existence of God. For example, at the 2011 Christian Scholars’ Conference at Pepperdine University, Francis Collins, a leading geneticist and director of the National Institutes of Health, said, “To get our universe, with all of its potential for complexities or any kind of potential for any kind of life-form, everything has to be precisely defined on this knife edge of improbability…. [Y]ou have to see the hands of a creator who set the parameters to be just so because the creator was interested in something a little more complicated than random particles.”



Miracle .....or coincidence?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

Ugh...you lying little charlatan....

Those quotes are mined and taken completely out of context. Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

Ugh...you lying little charlatan....

Those quotes are mined and taken completely out of context. Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

The link was provided in my post.

 

[Hollie]

You can hurl all the conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated with by the fundamentalist ministries but to insist the planet is 6,000 years old and a literal rendering of the genesis fable is true, well, that's really concerning.

Not indoctrination, but just what I read and compared after reading and believing in evolution -- evolution.berkeley.edu. I notice you do not answer my questions because you do not have the answers. Just "beliefs" in things that secular scientists made up. You believe in natural philosophy which is essentially BS because it's not observational, testable nor falsifiable. It's part of your worldview.

I notice you tend to throw nonsensical claims such as “you do not answer my questions” when your questions are addressed and the charlatans at the fundamentalist ministries leave you without a response.

literal creationism making the claim that the earth was created in 6 days about 6000-10000 years ago is nonsense. This hypothesis is easily disproven by many observations. It is inconsistent with the fossil record. We can see light from galaxies millions of light years away, which would be impossible if the cosmos were only 10,000 years old. So, this notion is easily disposed of. It is false. Creationism also fails the predictability and falsifiability tests. On these bases alone, creationism or YEC (young earth creationism) as it is called, is definitively been proven to be false. There is no sense in pursuing that nonsense any further.

The answer to the fundamentalist hacks is to allow the supporters of ID'iot creationism to publish a peer reviewed paper, and to examine it thoroughly. As you know, they won't. They know full well that these examinations will prove it as bothr false and useless from a scientific point of view.
It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. If you or any I.D.er's have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, no one has. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims.

 

[Hollie]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Forgive me if someone has already noted the Harper's article:


1. " …according to various calculations, if the values of some of the fundamental parameters of our universe were a little larger or a little smaller, life could not have arisen.

2. For example, if the nuclear force were a few percentage points stronger than it actually is, then all the hydrogen atoms in the infant universe would have fused with other hydrogen atoms to make helium, and there would be no hydrogen left. No hydrogen means no water.
Although we are far from certain about what conditions are necessary for life, most biologists believe that water is necessary.

4. On the other hand, if the nuclear force were substantially weaker than what it actually is, then the complex atoms needed for biology could not hold together.

5. As another example, if the relationship between the strengths of the gravitational force and the electromagnetic force were not close to what it is, then the cosmos would not harbor any stars that explode and spew out life-supporting chemical elements into space or any other stars that form planets. Both kinds of stars are required for the emergence of life.

6. The strengths of the basic forces and certain other fundamental parameters in our universe appear to be “fine-tuned” to allow the existence of life. The recognition of this fine tuning led British physicist Brandon Carter to articulate what he called the anthropic principle, which states that the universe must have the parameters it does because we are here to observe it. Actually, the word anthropic, from the Greek for “man,” is a misnomer: if these fundamental parameters were much different from what they are, it is not only human beings who would not exist.No life of any kind would exist."
The Accidental Universe | Harper's Magazine


" …the great question, of course, is why these fundamental parameters happen to lie within the range needed for life. Does the universe care about life? Intelligent design is one answer. Indeed, a fair number of theologians, philosophers, and even some scientists have used fine-tuning and the anthropic principle as evidence of the existence of God. For example, at the 2011 Christian Scholars’ Conference at Pepperdine University, Francis Collins, a leading geneticist and director of the National Institutes of Health, said, “To get our universe, with all of its potential for complexities or any kind of potential for any kind of life-form, everything has to be precisely defined on this knife edge of improbability…. [Y]ou have to see the hands of a creator who set the parameters to be just so because the creator was interested in something a little more complicated than random particles.”



Miracle .....or coincidence?

All your usual cut and paste "quote mining", so much of it dishonestly edited and parsed.

It's always funny when the ID'iot creationists / Flat Earth loons try to press the finely tuned universe nonsense.

It is simply laughable to press the finely tuned universe, nonsense The illusion of order is primarily an artifact of scale. We live in a profoundly violent and chaotic universe, but are spared direct experience with most of that chaos because it occurs on cosmic and geologic time scales, while we exist on a human time scale. This (luckily for us) means most of us expend our lifetimes in the brief moments of calm between supernovae, asteroid impact, and cometary bombardment.

We have already established that “complexity” is more a function of your limited imagination than a barrier to possibility.

 

[james bond]

Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

Your link is from some dumb atheist blog that has nothing to do with the article. You can't even explain what the blog said in your own words. The Harper's article is from a physicist and novelist who teaches at MIT. Soooooooo, that's some weak, weak, weak sauce you charlatan. When it comes to quote mining, you just did it. Pasted a link that you didn't even read. You do that to me and others practically all the time and never answer my questions like when I informed you about the fine tuning facts. Quote miing is from the atheist playbook.

OTOH, you saw the WLC video on it. We also know this is fact because there are no aliens. Not even one microbe has been found. Yet, NASA wants to spend millions to go to Mars when there is really no need to; We can't colonize it. All they want to do is find a microbe or evidence of past life. Instead, they may end up getting the astronauts killed because of the fine tuning facts, solar wind and lack of magnetic field protection. Real science already knows there is no life there because of its harsh environment. You believe in some weird stuff.

 

[james bond]

It's always funny when the ID'iot creationists / Flat Earth loons try to press the finely tuned universe nonsense.

Haha. You do not even know what you are talking about. The fine tuning facts were discovered by the secular scientists investigating the big bang theory. They don't mention it because it goes against their evolutionary thinking. It's you who is the flat earth looney tunes cartoon.

 

[james bond]

You can hurl all the conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated with by the fundamentalist ministries but to insist the planet is 6,000 years old and a literal rendering of the genesis fable is true, well, that's really concerning.

Not indoctrination, but just what I read and compared after reading and believing in evolution -- evolution.berkeley.edu. I notice you do not answer my questions because you do not have the answers. Just "beliefs" in things that secular scientists made up. You believe in natural philosophy which is essentially BS because it's not observational, testable nor falsifiable. It's part of your worldview.

I notice you tend to throw nonsensical claims such as “you do not answer my questions” when your questions are addressed and the charlatans at the fundamentalist ministries leave you without a response.

literal creationism making the claim that the earth was created in 6 days about 6000-10000 years ago is nonsense. This hypothesis is easily disproven by many observations. It is inconsistent with the fossil record. We can see light from galaxies millions of light years away, which would be impossible if the cosmos were only 10,000 years old. So, this notion is easily disposed of. It is false. Creationism also fails the predictability and falsifiability tests. On these bases alone, creationism or YEC (young earth creationism) as it is called, is definitively been proven to be false. There is no sense in pursuing that nonsense any further.

The answer to the fundamentalist hacks is to allow the supporters of ID'iot creationism to publish a peer reviewed paper, and to examine it thoroughly. As you know, they won't. They know full well that these examinations will prove it as bothr false and useless from a scientific point of view.
It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. If you or any I.D.er's have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, no one has. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims.

Your derogatory answer to the question is wrong because you assume the universe is standing still.. Atheist and their scientific explanations are usually wrong. In order to answer how the light of stars billions of light years away from the earth have reached us when Earth is only thousands of years old is gravitational time dilation. It follows Einstein's general theory of relativity. Light from stars billions of light years away are slowed by gravity wells all throughout space. Space is not just empty but composed of ether and is infinitely elastic. The huge mass of planets, stars and what's out in space form these gravity wells so that light has to pass through these wells and is slowed. Also, we are seeing light from the past and in the past the universe was much denser. All of this causes the effect of seeing the light from "billions of years" away when we've only been here for thousands of years.

Another way to look at it is it's like traveling in a time machine if you can travel near the speed of light for one year away from Earth. When you come back to Earth, we will have aged much more than you who would have aged only two years. You would think that you traveled into the future. The gravitation time dilation is the opposite effect as light is traveling towards us.

 

[Hollie]

You can hurl all the conspiracy theories you have been indoctrinated with by the fundamentalist ministries but to insist the planet is 6,000 years old and a literal rendering of the genesis fable is true, well, that's really concerning.

Not indoctrination, but just what I read and compared after reading and believing in evolution -- evolution.berkeley.edu. I notice you do not answer my questions because you do not have the answers. Just "beliefs" in things that secular scientists made up. You believe in natural philosophy which is essentially BS because it's not observational, testable nor falsifiable. It's part of your worldview.

I notice you tend to throw nonsensical claims such as “you do not answer my questions” when your questions are addressed and the charlatans at the fundamentalist ministries leave you without a response.

literal creationism making the claim that the earth was created in 6 days about 6000-10000 years ago is nonsense. This hypothesis is easily disproven by many observations. It is inconsistent with the fossil record. We can see light from galaxies millions of light years away, which would be impossible if the cosmos were only 10,000 years old. So, this notion is easily disposed of. It is false. Creationism also fails the predictability and falsifiability tests. On these bases alone, creationism or YEC (young earth creationism) as it is called, is definitively been proven to be false. There is no sense in pursuing that nonsense any further.

The answer to the fundamentalist hacks is to allow the supporters of ID'iot creationism to publish a peer reviewed paper, and to examine it thoroughly. As you know, they won't. They know full well that these examinations will prove it as bothr false and useless from a scientific point of view.
It is not necessary for scientists to prove that design is not required for the complexity we see in nature. NONE of the scientific theories that explain natural phenomena make appeals to an unseen designer. If you or any I.D.er's have evidence that something shows signs of being designed (something that could not have arisen naturally) please come forward with it. To date, no one has. You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Intelligent Design advocates are the ones introducing supernatural forces... they are the ones who must substantiate their incredible claims.

Your derogatory answer to the question is wrong because you assume the universe is standing still.. Atheist and their scientific explanations are usually wrong. In order to answer how the light of stars billions of light years away from the earth have reached us when Earth is only thousands of years old is gravitational time dilation. It follows Einstein's general theory of relativity. Light from stars billions of light years away are slowed by gravity wells all throughout space. Space is not just empty but composed of ether and is infinitely elastic. The huge mass of planets, stars and what's out in space form these gravity wells so that light has to pass through these wells and is slowed. Also, we are seeing light from the past and in the past the universe was much denser. All of this causes the effect of seeing the light from "billions of years" away when we've only been here for thousands of years.

Another way to look at it is it's like traveling in a time machine if you can travel near the speed of light for one year away from Earth. When you come back to Earth, we will have aged much more than you who would have aged only two years. You would think that you traveled into the future. The gravitation time dilation is the opposite effect as light is traveling towards us.

When you get your science lessons from ID/creationist hacks at AIG, you will, of course, reach some rather odd conclusions about the natural world.

Why don’t you point us toward the relevant studies performed by AIG and the data they submitted for peer review.

 

[Hollie]

It's always funny when the ID'iot creationists / Flat Earth loons try to press the finely tuned universe nonsense.

Haha. You do not even know what you are talking about. The fine tuning facts were discovered by the secular scientists investigating the big bang theory. They don't mention it because it goes against their evolutionary thinking. It's you who is the flat earth looney tunes cartoon.

Your conspiracy theories are entertaining but as conspiracy theories go, absent verification.

How do you explain the “fine tuning” by the gods when the universe is actually a quite violent and disorderly place?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your link is from some dumb atheist blog that has nothing to do with the article

Actually, you shameless little liar,the link I provided provides the original context to the mined quotes showing quite clearly that they were intentionally taken out of context in order to mtisrepresent them

Which you did not know, because you did not actually really a single word of the link i provided. Yet you commented on it anyway, because you are a lying little weasel.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

Ugh...you lying little charlatan....

Those quotes are mined and taken completely out of context. Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

Well, then, fool....you should be able to find a way to show that he did not say "In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."



Waiting.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

Ugh...you lying little charlatan....

Those quotes are mined and taken completely out of context. Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

Well, then, fool....you should be able to find a way to show that he did not say "In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."



Waiting.

Of course, the context matters. Not that you know it or care. But those who want to understand will read the link i I provided. You won't, and you will keep on regurgitating mined quotes from lyong bloggers.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Kaku’s conclusion is pretty is clear.

“The final solution resolution could be that God is a mathematician,” says Kaku. “The mind of God, we believe, is cosmic music. The music of strings resonating through 11-dimensional hyperspace.”

“To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance.”

World-Famous Scientist: God Created the Universe

String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created

Dr. Hawking, who also admits the mathematical improbability of our universe:
"It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us."

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

"Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have collapsed before it ever reached its present size."

"The remarkable fact is that the values of these numbers seem to have been very finely adjusted to make possible the development of life ..."
Stephen Hawking
Stephen Hawking

Ugh...you lying little charlatan....

Those quotes are mined and taken completely out of context. Here is a brief explanation for those who wish to know the facts and want to understand how a charlatan like politicalchic operates:
The Language of God: Quantum Quote-Mining

Well, then, fool....you should be able to find a way to show that he did not say "In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."



Waiting.

Of course, the context matters. Not that you know it or care. But those who want to understand will read the link i I provided. You won't, and you will keep on regurgitating mined quotes from lyong bloggers.

So where is the context that obviates the quote?


Put your foot in your mouth again, huh, dunce?



"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

He said it, and he meant exactly that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

So where is the context that obviates the quote?

For the third time, in the link I provided. As I said, those interested in understanding how lying charlatans like you operate will read it. Those who don't, won't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So where is the context that obviates the quote?

For the third time, in the link I provided. As I said, those interested in understanding how lying charlatans like you operate will read it. Those who don't, won't.

I caught you lying again, huh?

State your proof that the line is not his, and is out of context.


You're simply lying......low-life.

"In fact, if one considers the possible constants and laws that could have emerged, the odds against a universe that has produced life like ours are immense."

He said it, and he meant exactly that.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

State your proof that the line is not his, and is out of context.

I didn't say it wasn't his. I said it was mined out of context in order to misrepresentat his thoughts and intentions. And the proof is in the link. I really do not care if you believe me or not. You are a lying charlatan.