I watched this again tonight. I can't get over how laugh-out-loud funny it is. Just the way Maher concludes every interview. Genius. "Do you have a hard on?" lololololol.
Are you agnostic about the existence of a teapot orbiting Saturn? Pink unicorns? The Flying Spaghetti Monster (PBUH)?
Here's all you need to know about religion: #1: As smart as you think you are, you do not know everything.. #2: Personally, the idea of "knowing" there is no God is pompous. #3: Believe or don't believe. Personally, I've seen too many miracles in my life not to. Religions constantly warring against one another is puzzling, but not completely that difficult to understand if we are all going to Heaven or Hell. Personally, I think the Earth MAY actually be pergatory itself, with the idea that the truly rightous go to Heaven; the truly damned go to Hell, and the rest replay it. And I say this as a devout Christian. Just not a church-going one. Point is, nobody knows, regardless of research. Hell, we're just now seeing the beginning of the Universe through Hubble. If that can't open your mind to endless possibilities about its creation, nothing will. Just like the Rockets... BELIEVE
The basis of science is doubt. The basis of religion is faith (absence of doubt). The two are polar opposites. I believe there could be a god. Forced to choose, I would say there isn't. To me, a wide view of history over the past several thousand years shows that the "god" concept is used to fill in what science can not yet explain. The more science advances and the more phenomena are explained, the less religious people become.
In the 1930's, 1940's and 1950's, everybody believed in something called The Steady State Universe. All the big names were absolutely positive that it was truth. The biggest big name in theoretical astrophysics, Albert Einstein famously created the cosmological constant for his equations because he couldn't conceive of anything but a steady state universe. He laughed at the idea that any other conception of reality could be true. As this was going on, a couple of guys (Robert Wilson and Arno Penzias) - absolute nobodies in the world of Astrophysics - were drudging along at Bell Labs working on practical issues of satellite communications. Very tangible stuff, unrelated to big abstract concerns like the nature of the Universe. But one of the main tools they had for their work was a new kind of radio telescope. And this telescope had a problem. No matter what they did, there was a sound that wouldn't go away, no matter which direction they pointed the telescope. They tried and tried, but they couldn't find the source. They first tried to rule out things like airplanes and stars. They even tried to explain it as some strange things, like pigeon s--t. But no matter what they did, they couldn't isolate the source of this hiss at a very specific frequency. Eventually, they were talking with some other smart guys that they knew who spoke to some other smart guys who were the only ones able to explain it. The sound was the echo of the Big Bang in this novel concept of an expanding, finite universe. The facts were so plain that everybody, even the people like Einstein who years before were laughing at the idea, had to eventually come around and accept the truth. Many of them, like Einstein, absolutely hated and felt intuitively that it couldn't be right. They even spent years trying to disprove it. But in the end, even they had to admit what the facts were telling them. So this little bit of evidence, found by two nobodies working on a completely different problem, inexorably forced the smartest minds in the world to their knees, making them reject beliefs that they had held dearly for decades, because that is what the evidence showed. So in response to your question that, exactly, is how The Big Bang is different from "And then it was".
just saw this today. as a growing atheist (from an agnostic), this is like me being a fat kid and getting fed ice cream. maher's points -- if taken rationally without his usual ironic condescending tics -- are interesting for further debates.. but the smarmy attitude, one that's too dismissive, got to me. the best parts was when he gets seemingly successful people in logical binds. i guess it hit close to home since i grew up Southern Baptist where church camps were common as was the age old reasonings shown in the movie (Trinity=water, God knows more, 'what if you're wrong') that are taught in all good evangelical Sunday School books.
Couldn't agree more about Max I come across as wanting to cure the homosexual, but I don't want to do that, love alot, life is short as far as an exception... I am certain I have as many or more flaws and failings as anyone posting- there is no doubt on that... I confess only to loving Jesus there are many great people on Clutchfans... I mean come on we are all Rocket fans,
I don't think you get it. The Big Bang theory confirms more than debunks the theory. You need to do more research. There was a huge write up about it when NASA confirmed this. Regardless, until "science" can definitively divide 10 by 3; a relatively simple task, one would think, I'm really not going to go to science as an end all-be all knowledge source. Their "theories" and "laws" have been debunked time and time again, and I'm sure every generation had imbeciles that took it as "law" at the time those debunked theories were proposed. We don't know everything. We never will. Deal with it.
Otto's point was that science is nothing like religion in that science encourages question, doubt, research, experiment, and proof in an endless cycle to advance our knowledge. It is amazing to me how you spit in the face of something you so obviously have no clue about. You, not otto, are the one who entirely missed the point here.
You are the most clueless person in this thread, which is really saying something. Tell me about bitterness sometime, captain bile...
Mmhmm. I express differing views, and you come back with personal insults. I've had it with how many people have turned into whiny b****es recently.
Do please expound on this "research". I'm sure you're an expert. This might be the dumbest thing I've ever read. You arrogantly portray your own ignorance. Bravo.
If I wanted to personally insult you, believe me, there's enough ammo around I could. However, I am insulting your logical laziness and the absurd nature of your claims. Other than those things, you're an allright guy I suppose. who is dismissive and bitter again?
About whether anyone "knows" whether there is life after death?!? LOL. What? I believe. Period. If you think you KNOW, get a clue.
