Victor John Stenger (/ˈstɛŋɡər/ January 29, 1935 – August 25, 2014) was an American particle physicist, philosopher, author, and religious skeptic.
When people start using science to argue for their specific beliefs and delusions, to try to claim that they're supported by science, then scientists at least have to speak up and say, You re welcome to your delusions, but don't say that they're supported by science.
The problem is that people think faith is something to be admired. In fact, faith means you believe in something for which you have no evidence.
Any attempt at understanding humanity must include an explanation of the hold that supernatural belief continues to have on most of the human race.
Alternative explanations are always welcome in science, if they are better and explain more. Alternative explanations that explain nothing are not welcome. . . Note how science changed those beliefs when new data became available. Religions stick to the same ancient beliefs regardless of the data.
Selling eternal life is an unbeatable business, with no customers ever asking for their money back after the goods are not delivered.
Define self-awareness and tell me what it is about it that requires something more than a material explanation. I do not accept the burden of explaining all phenomena, real or imagined. If you think more than matter is required for this thing you call self-awareness, which you have not defined, then you have the burden of showing why.
While science continually uncovers new mysteries, it has removed much of what was once regarded as deeply mysterious. Although we certainly do not know the exact nature of every component of the universe, the basic principles of physics seem to apply out to the farthest horizon visible to us today.
Thought, without the data on which to structure that thought, leads nowhere.
Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
A scenario is suggested by which the universe and its laws could have arisen naturally from nothing. Current cosmology suggests that no laws of physics were violated in bringing the universe into existence. The laws of physics themselves are shown to correspond to what one would expect if the universe appeared from nothing. There is something rather than nothing because something is more stable.
To most theistic believers, human life can have no meaning in a universe without God. Quite sincerely, and with understandable yearning for a meaning to their existence, they reject the possibility of no God. In their minds, only a purposeful universe based on God is possible and science can do nothing else but support thistruth.
Is there a place in a church where you leave your brains when you enter?
I do not think science has to make any apologies. It looks at the world and tells it like it is. And we all live longer, better lives because of this dispassionate view. Sure, it commands awe and provides inspiration. Still, I would rather be operated on by a surgeon who sees me as an assemblage of atoms than one who lovingly tries to manipulate what he or she imagines are my vital energy fields.
Reality is what kicks back when you kick it. This is just what physicists do with their particle accelerators. We kick reality and feel it kick back. From the intensity and duration of thousands of those kicks over many years, we have formed a coherent theory of matter and forces, called the standard model, that currently agrees with all observations.
Proof is not required to believe [in a god]. But some sign, some evidence is needed. None exists. . . Find some inkling of evidence. There is none.
In fact, current cosmological observations indicate that the average density of matter and energy in the universe is equal, within measurement errors, to the critical density for which the total energy of the universe was exactly zero at the beginning.
Debating is not an honest intellectual exercise. It's like a trial in which the goal is not to get to the truth but to win.
I have characterized Ross as exemplifying an extreme position among theistic scientists. However, he is not so extreme as to promote the scientifically unsound notions of the young-Earth creationists and other anti-evolutionists. . . They are so far off the scale that their scientific claims need not be taken seriously. Their distortions and misrepresentations of the scientific facts are not consistent with their self-righteous claims of acting to protect all that is good and moral.
Assuming the universe came from nothing, it is empty to begin with. . . Only by the constant action of an agent outside the universe, such as God, could a state of nothingness be maintained. The fact that we have something is just what we would expect if there is no God.
Just because quantum mechanics is weird does not mean that everything that is weird is quantum mechanics.