| Users Online Now: 1,455 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 361,328 | |
| Pageviews Today: 567,180 | Threads Today: 212 | Posts Today: 3,470 |
| 06:19 AM | ||
| Users Online Now: 1,455 (Who's On?) | Visitors Today: 361,328 | |
| Pageviews Today: 567,180 | Threads Today: 212 | Posts Today: 3,470 |
| 06:19 AM | ||
Dr. Neil DeGrasse - A fascinatingly disturbing thought | |
boltacular  User ID: 33597030  United States02/22/2013 05:52 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What is fascinatingly disturbing is that brilliant people like Neil DeGrasse can invasion and embrace thoughts like that and at the same time spend their whole lives coming up with ever more complicated ways to deny that we could have been created on purpose by God. They can accept unfathomably intelligent beings, but they can't accept the concept of God. Sad. Quoting: Resister Dr. Tyson has actually spent his life researching and looking for answers of the universe which has led him to believe that it is unlikely that god exists. If you spend your whole life looking in the sky for answers thinking it will look like a red box, you may never see the answer of the blue ball beneath your own feet. You can't see what you are not looking at. I'm not saying the guy isn't smart or observant and I'm not going to be insulting like some others in this thread have been. Look at my first sentence. I called him brilliant. I enjoy listening to people like him discuss science. He is awesome at that, but Neil isn't looking for God. He is looking to explain the mechanics of the universe in the absence of God because he doesn't care. That is what I called sad. He sees so much and yet is still blind to what matters most. Don't believe me? Ask him. Here he is in his own words. He says, "I'm agnostic and it's more that I don't really care. I don't want to have to spend all this energy, but I keep getting called out into the boxing ring, largely against my wishes." He just wants to chase the mechanics of science and ignore the Creator of it. That is what is so sad. Real scientists (not this hack) who actually try to find things that aren't apart of the agenda (like God) get fired, lose their grants, get casted out of their fields, and lose all credibility. That's why we will never scientifically know for sure God exists...and that's why this guy doesn't give a shit. He's paid very well not to. Guns don't kill people, the government does--Dale Gribble, King of the Hill |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 1547105 United States02/22/2013 05:54 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 33223464 United States02/22/2013 05:57 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | What is fascinatingly disturbing is that brilliant people like Neil DeGrasse can invasion and embrace thoughts like that and at the same time spend their whole lives coming up with ever more complicated ways to deny that we could have been created on purpose by God. They can accept unfathomably intelligent beings, but they can't accept the concept of God. Sad. Quoting: Resister Dr. Tyson has actually spent his life researching and looking for answers of the universe which has led him to believe that it is unlikely that god exists. If you spend your whole life looking in the sky for answers thinking it will look like a red box, you may never see the answer of the blue ball beneath your own feet. You can't see what you are not looking at. I'm not saying the guy isn't smart or observant and I'm not going to be insulting like some others in this thread have been. Look at my first sentence. I called him brilliant. I enjoy listening to people like him discuss science. He is awesome at that, but Neil isn't looking for God. He is looking to explain the mechanics of the universe in the absence of God because he doesn't care. That is what I called sad. He sees so much and yet is still blind to what matters most. Don't believe me? Ask him. Here he is in his own words. He says, "I'm agnostic and it's more that I don't really care. I don't want to have to spend all this energy, but I keep getting called out into the boxing ring, largely against my wishes." He just wants to chase the mechanics of science and ignore the Creator of it. That is what is so sad. Real scientists (not this hack) who actually try to find things that aren't apart of the agenda (like God) get fired, lose their grants, get casted out of their fields, and lose all credibility. That's why we will never scientifically know for sure God exists...and that's why this guy doesn't give a shit. He's paid very well not to. Boom Bam! |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 26795689 United States02/22/2013 06:10 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | If you spend your whole life looking in the sky for answers thinking it will look like a red box, you may never see the answer of the blue ball beneath your own feet. You can't see what you are not looking at. Quoting: Resister I'm not saying the guy isn't smart or observant and I'm not going to be insulting like some others in this thread have been. Look at my first sentence. I called him brilliant. I enjoy listening to people like him discuss science. He is awesome at that, but Neil isn't looking for God. He is looking to explain the mechanics of the universe in the absence of God because he doesn't care. That is what I called sad. He sees so much and yet is still blind to what matters most. Don't believe me? Ask him. Here he is in his own words. He says, "I'm agnostic and it's more that I don't really care. I don't want to have to spend all this energy, but I keep getting called out into the boxing ring, largely against my wishes." He just wants to chase the mechanics of science and ignore the Creator of it. That is what is so sad. 'Chasing' the mechanics and science of the Universe is ignoring the Creator? Under what terms can seeking to understand the nature of the Creation and this 'reality' that we experience be viewed as ignoring the Creator? You said he rejects the concept of 'God'. Which concept of 'God'? The Abrahamic 'God' of the bible? The Roman or Greek 'Gods'? The Sumerian & Egyptian 'Gods'? As humankind has evolved and changed, so has the conceptualizations of 'God' or 'Gods' (a higher power). With that understanding we know that how we conceive of 'God' today will not be how mankind conceives of 'God' in the future, because it will continue to change the way it has done in the past. It's a product of the evolution of humankind. So to say he rejects 'God' is more of a subjective observation than anything else. He may reject the commonly accepted portrayal or conceptualization of 'God', but that does not mean he rejects the possibility of a higher force or power that drives the Universe. He said in the passage that you quoted that he's an agnostic. I think that means that you reserve judgement and do not allow others to force their conceptualization & beliefs about 'God' upon you. What again is so troubling about his pursuit to bring a greater understanding and awareness of the workings of the Universe?  |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 34959221 United States02/22/2013 08:02 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | So just as Carl Sagan stated that we came from star stuff and all matter came from the stars so does he however the stars themselves were created at one point. What created the matter and energy which gave birth to the universe and the stars and all that can be seen within our minds... |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 30460893 United States02/22/2013 08:12 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | If you spend your whole life looking in the sky for answers thinking it will look like a red box, you may never see the answer of the blue ball beneath your own feet. You can't see what you are not looking at. Quoting: Resister I'm not saying the guy isn't smart or observant and I'm not going to be insulting like some others in this thread have been. Look at my first sentence. I called him brilliant. I enjoy listening to people like him discuss science. He is awesome at that, but Neil isn't looking for God. He is looking to explain the mechanics of the universe in the absence of God because he doesn't care. That is what I called sad. He sees so much and yet is still blind to what matters most. Don't believe me? Ask him. Here he is in his own words. He says, "I'm agnostic and it's more that I don't really care. I don't want to have to spend all this energy, but I keep getting called out into the boxing ring, largely against my wishes." He just wants to chase the mechanics of science and ignore the Creator of it. That is what is so sad. 'Chasing' the mechanics and science of the Universe is ignoring the Creator? Under what terms can seeking to understand the nature of the Creation and this 'reality' that we experience be viewed as ignoring the Creator? You said he rejects the concept of 'God'. Which concept of 'God'? The Abrahamic 'God' of the bible? The Roman or Greek 'Gods'? The Sumerian & Egyptian 'Gods'? As humankind has evolved and changed, so has the conceptualizations of 'God' or 'Gods' (a higher power). With that understanding we know that how we conceive of 'God' today will not be how mankind conceives of 'God' in the future, because it will continue to change the way it has done in the past. It's a product of the evolution of humankind. So to say he rejects 'God' is more of a subjective observation than anything else. He may reject the commonly accepted portrayal or conceptualization of 'God', but that does not mean he rejects the possibility of a higher force or power that drives the Universe. He said in the passage that you quoted that he's an agnostic. I think that means that you don't allow others to force their conceptualization & beliefs about 'God' upon you. What again is so troubling about his pursuit to bring a greater understanding and awareness for the workings of the Universe? Very well stated response to the poster. I wish people who are so intent on religion (Note:RELIGION, not God) would realize that science is not about proving or disproving God. It's about finding out about the world we live in and it's environs. Science finds 'X' is fact. It's too much for some of these religious people because they take it as slam against their beliefs. Do these religious people even realize if they brought the typical European from 1400 to today to observe the way they live (cars, television, computers, etc.) they'd say this was of the devil? It didn't exist in their world and God didn't create it, so these magic things MUST be of the devil. I just don't understand the willful ignorance of some people. We've evolved a little since 1400...oh, but there is no such thing as evolution. Lol...yeah, riiiiiight. |
| LSDreamer User ID: 14896274  Australia02/22/2013 08:17 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 26533342 United States02/22/2013 08:24 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | DeGrasse is a second rate scientist. Seriously, can anyone even cite one brilliant paper, contribution, theory or observation he has made? Just a token talking head is all. There are much better higher caliber scientists, mathematicians, logicians and philosophers who you should pay closer attention too. |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 9540311 United States02/22/2013 08:26 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
| Anonymous Coward User ID: 35203833 United States02/26/2013 01:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
