Skip to comments.Baroness Greenfield criticises 'Taliban-like' Stephen Hawking
Posted on 09/08/2010 10:40:57 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
Physicists like Professor Stephen Hawking who claim God has no place in the creation of the Universe are behaving like the Taliban in trying to shut down freedom of discussion, according to Baroness Greenfield the former head of the Royal Institution.
Stephen Hawking and Baroness Greenfield
Lady Greenfield, former head of the Royal Institution and current professor of synaptic pharmacology at Lincoln College, Oxford, criticised the "smugness" of scientists who claim to have all the answers
Hawking also attacked philosophers for failing to keep up with modern developments in physics and biology so that their discussions seem increasingly outdated and irrelevant.
Lady Greenfield said: Science can often suffer from a certain smugness and complacency. Michael Faraday, one of the greatest scientists, had a wonderful quote, he said: Theres nothing quite as frightening as someone who knows they are right
What we need to preserve in science is a curiosity and an open-mindedness rather than a complacency and sort of arrogance where we attack people who come at the big truths and the big questions albeit using different strategies.
Asked whether she was uncomfortable about scientists making comments about God, she said: Yes I am. Of course they can make whatever comments they like but when they assume, rather in a Taliban-like way, that they have all the answers then I do feel uncomfortable. I think that doesnt necessarily do science a service.
She was also critical of Prof Hawking's comments about philosophy, saying: Scientists have a duty, if they want to have people who arent scientists to appreciate that value of what they are doing, if they want to place it into a wider social and moral context, the duty is on the scientist to explain in words ordinary human being can understand. What is dangerous
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
He simply stated something as if it were reasoned fact when in fact is is not.
He has every right to say whatever he wants. But he does not have the right to claim it under the banner of science.
In short he's totally blown his credibility by making major conclusions under the veil of science where he does not have evidence to back up his claims. He offers his arrogance instead.
Doesn't this man have children? He really can't see the hands of God in his own offspring? What it tells is that his psychology has bittered towards the last few years of life... sad... a lot like fat-ebert without the ignorance.
Do you understand the definition of "theoretical physics"?
"He simply stated something as if it were reasoned fact when in fact is is not."
No, what he stated was his conclusion, not fact. Again, see the definition of "theoretical".
"He has every right to say whatever he wants. But he does not have the right to claim it under the banner of science."
He has every right to hypothesis, especially in his field of expertise - an expertise that I'd wager dwarfs whatever understanding you might have on the same subject.
"In short he's totally blown his credibility by making major conclusions under the veil of science where he does not have evidence to back up his claims. "
In short, time will tell. Again, you demonstrate that you don't have the first clue about how the process of theoretical science plays out. Many of the ideas that were first postulated by Newton, took hundreds of years before science could construct tests to prove them or disapprove. With Einstein's theories, it's taken decades, even generations and some yet remain to be proven.
I wouldn't bet against Hawking when he's speaking about physics. He's accomplished more trapped inside the prison of his own body, than most men accomplish in a lifetime.
She has a point. The science press gives Hawking more voice than he deserves. He knows it and uses loaded terms and ideas. His views go unchecked straight to the people. She takes license to liken such pronouncements as Taliban like. I'm ok with that.
I'm sure he'll probably lose some sleep over that.
Sure, he knows more about physics than non physicists. His big accomplishment is Hawking Radiation. To me that is small potatoes compared to Einstein's contributions, an able bodied man. There are plenty of other able bodied physicists who are making major contributions to physics but you never here of them. The PC press just loves to roll out the disabled as exemplars of achievement at the expense of the able bodied.
He is billigerent. And he deserves the same back at him. Atheists are full of their nasty selves these days and are running around debasing religious people with pure disrespect and hatred. They think they are superior and that is why the come across as big fat racists/fascists. No humility and no social intellegence in that kind of intolerant and disrespectful behavior.
We can build Victory Mosques in NY and burn Korans and we can run around shouting down Christians and hating Joooos and Isarel because we are free to do these things. But that is rude and inconsiderate behavior. All of that is the same mentality and it breeds more of the same.
Atheists need some of their own medicine about now. They are way out of control in the hate and mistaken superiority department.
He needs more feedback from his universe. He is an arrogant ass.
More press than he deserves? Says who?
How much "voice" should the music press give to Mozart? Or the medical press give to Salk?
This is Steven Hawking you're talking about, not some undergrad at UC Irvine.
"His views go unchecked straight to the people"
Shocking! His views go unchecked straight to the people. How dare he? What is the world coming to? Next you're going to tell us that there's a free press, and everything.
Please let us know who you believe the arbiter of "good science" should be, and what are the "clearance" procedures that must be completed before views can go "checked" to the people.
And your credentials in the field of physics are what exactly? You know, just so we can evaluate your determinations as cited.
Oh good grief. What drivel. Hawking was the Lucasian Chair of Mathematics for the better part of three decades. Do you know who also held that chair? Newton, that's who. It's the most prestigious academic chair in science.
Shirley you are foolin’.
I see you understanding of physics is only surpassed by your command of the English language.
Careful you don’t trip and fall with your nose up in the air so high.
Is exactly what you'd expect someone to say who is so reflexively hostile to scientific discovery.
Hostile to scientific discovery...so prove God does not exist, dummy.
Science was not your strong suit in high school, was it? Do yourself a favor, and look up argumentum ad ignorantiam .
Where's the mathematical hypothesis concluding God played no role in the creation of the universe?
Einstein's theories, Newtons theories all had mathematical basis for various relationships.
Hawking pulled this one out of his ass.
I don't have to be physicists to have common sense. Are you really going to argue Hawking can tell us with ANY confidence through science that God played no part in the creation of the universe which is basically his claim? And if he can't offer any confidence beyond 50-50 what's the point in saying it?