Lawrence Krauss

by KateWild 42 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Mikado

  he is amazing, really like him..
• 

  LV101

  Cofty - Thanks for linking video. Very interesting and only half finished. Ordering book for husband.
• 

  snare&racket

  The dude discovered the red shift acceleration..... he is a physics legend...

  So a smart guy is against god and religion therefore his science is no good? It doesn't make sense.

  There is no evidence for your god kate, so how on earth can it's non existing data inturrupt modern science? Scientists DO NOT talk about god in their day job, he doesn't come up, there is no reason for him to as there is absoloutely no shred of evidence that he even exists in any of the scientific fields.

  You being a claimed scientist who despite this knowledge of no evidence STILL believes in god, may want to consider where the confirmation biases lie and the cognitive dissonance begins.

  Krauss? ......as everyone says, please do show your workings out for this conclusion?

  Isn't his beliefs infact simply reflecting the science and data? Quite the opposite to the claim in the OP when you think about what he believes and why and what you believe and why....

  snare x

  P.s. Kate have you read any of his books yet? Which ones if so?
• 

  jhine

  I do not know this about this chap at all , so can't comment about him . I think that an example of what Kate is saying is that an anti-smoking group in the UK were once forced to admit that they had "fudged " statistics to encourage people to give up smoking . I understand their reasons and they felt that they were rescuing people from the evils of tobacco etc but their enthusiasm led them to take the veiw that the ends justified the means . Maybe Kate you suspect that this could happen elsewhere when someone has a very heartfelt personal agenda .

  Jan
• 

  KateWild

  Scientists DO NOT talk about god in their day job, he doesn't come up, there is no reason for him to as there is absoloutely no shred of evidence that he even exists in any of the scientific fields.-snare

  Krauss as an author talks about God, he is anti-theist. I have not yet read any of his books, but as I said earlier in the post I will read "A universe from nothing". I don't find him credible because he is anti-theist. Any scientist who is anti-theist is prejudice.

  I would not class myself as a theist, but I am not against anyone who choses to believe that God answers their prayers and helps them. I don't agree with their beliefs, but I understand their perspective. I predict Krauss will have a style much the same as Dawkins so after reading Dawkins I don't particularly feel attracted to reading another atheist activists work. But I will to give him the benefit of the doubt.

  You're right snare, I am bias, it's likely I am still working through CD, I can't rule it out.

  Aren't we all bias though?

  Kate xx
• 

  jookbeard

  stupid thread Kate , try reading some of his material before making such dumb judgments
• 

  jookbeard

  stupid thread Kate , try reading some of his material before making such dumb judgments
• 

  snare&racket

  Kate, these scientists are coming out the wood work with their views on god and religion because they are literally banning science textbooks in american schools, they are going to court and having creation myths or ID forced into science classes!

  Scientists have become vocal because they feel their BASE OF KNOWLEDGE is under attack. They speak up because of their concerns for science and knowledge divulged from science.

  Had you read Dawkins and Krauss as you have mentioned them, you would already know this. Dawkins was a professor at oxford, his position given was 'communication of science' and he came up against anti-science religious movements in his role hence he started discussing it more and more vocally. Dawkins is an animal behaviourist expert by training with considerable experience in evolution and general biology. God does not show up in his experiements for his day job!

  Krauss is a cosmologist. He studies gasses and stars and atoms and energy and matter.....not god. The phrase I used about Krauss not talking about god at all, ever in his day job in a quote from him and his book. Cosmologists are not paid to do god or religion, they do science, they do experiments.

  My point was, how on earth could a bias enter into his sicnetific experimental discovaries, when there is no science or evidence of any supernatural kind and non for a god. I am in no doubt of this at all because I know how the scientific method is used, so I ask all this because I don't understand how you think his views can alter his cosmology science results?

  I have spent 7 years neck deep in the sciences and god and religion has not come up once in the scientific realm. It has had no relevance as we deal with data and the scientific method.

  You speak of your years doing chemistry, think about how odd it would be for the judeo-christian deity to be introduced in a chemistry lab experiemng in any way. It is an odd claim, it doesn't even make sense as a concept.....it just is not what science does.

  Come on Kaye, it's early in the morning, but not that early! :P x
• 

  KateWild

  jookbeard try reading the whole thread before you comment, you just look silly.

  Snare, you make some good points, as I said maybe I am bias, I will give him the benefit of the doubt and read "A universe from nothing"

  Thanks for your input into this thread

  Kate xx
• 

  snare&racket

  No worries, if you had this question on your mind maybe others do too.

  It is good to have it voiced and discussed so visitors/lurkers can see how science works if they feel the same way.