The defining characteristic of a black hole may have to give, if the two pillars of modern physics — general relativity and quantum theory — are both correct. Artist's impression VICTOR HABBICK VISIONS/SPL/Getty
Notion of an 'event horizon', from which nothing can escape, is incompatible with quantum theory, physicist claims.
Zeeya Merali 24 January 2014
Most physicists foolhardy enough to write a paper claiming that “there are no black holes” — at least not in the sense we usually imagine — would probably be dismissed as cranks. But when the call to redefine these cosmic crunchers comes from Stephen Hawking, it’s worth taking notice. In a paper posted online, the physicist, based at the University of Cambridge, UK, and one of the creators of modern black-hole theory, does away with the notion of an event horizon, the invisible boundary thought to shroud every black hole, beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape.
In its stead, Hawking’s radical proposal is a much more benign “apparent horizon”, which only temporarily holds matter and energy prisoner before eventually releasing them, albeit in a more garbled form.
“There is no escape from a black hole in classical theory,” Hawking told Nature. Quantum theory, however, “enables energy and information to escape from a black hole”. A full explanation of the process, the physicist admits, would require a theory that successfully merges gravity with the other fundamental forces of nature. But that is a goal that has eluded physicists for nearly a century. “The correct treatment,” Hawking says, “remains a mystery.”
Hawking posted his paper on the arXiv [ http://arxiv.org/abs/1401.5761 ] preprint server on 22 January. He titled it, whimsically, 'Information preservation and weather forecasting for black holes', and it has yet to pass peer review. The paper was based on a talk he gave via Skype at a meeting at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara, California, in August 2013 (watch video of the talk [ http://online.kitp.ucsb.edu/online/fuzzorfire_m13/hawking/ ]).
Fire fighting
Hawking's new work is an attempt to solve what is known as the black-hole firewall paradox, which has been vexing physicists for almost two years, after it was discovered by theoretical physicist Joseph Polchinski of the Kavli Institute and his colleagues (see 'Astrophysics: Fire in the hole! [ http://www.nature.com/news/astrophysics-fire-in-the-hole-1.12726 ]').
In a thought experiment, the researchers asked what would happen to an astronaut unlucky enough to fall into a black hole. Event horizons are mathematically simple consequences of Einstein's general theory of relativity that were first pointed out by the German astronomer Karl Schwarzschild in a letter he wrote to Einstein [ http://alberteinstein.info/vufind1/Record/EAR000006266 ] in late 1915, less than a month after the publication of the theory. In that picture, physicists had long assumed, the astronaut would happily pass through the event horizon, unaware of his or her impending doom, before gradually being pulled inwards — stretched out along the way, like spaghetti — and eventually crushed at the 'singularity', the black hole’s hypothetical infinitely dense core.
But on analysing the situation in detail, Polchinski’s team came to the startling realization that the laws of quantum mechanics, which govern particles on small scales, change the situation completely. Quantum theory, they said, dictates that the event horizon must actually be transformed into a highly energetic region, or 'firewall', that would burn the astronaut to a crisp.
This was alarming because, although the firewall obeyed quantum rules, it flouted Einstein’s general theory of relativity. According to that theory, someone in free fall should perceive the laws of physics as being identical everywhere in the Universe — whether they are falling into a black hole or floating in empty intergalactic space. As far as Einstein is concerned, the event horizon should be an unremarkable place.
Beyond the horizon
Now Hawking proposes a third, tantalizingly simple, option. Quantum mechanics and general relativity remain intact, but black holes simply do not have an event horizon to catch fire. The key to his claim is that quantum effects around the black hole cause space-time to fluctuate too wildly for a sharp boundary surface to exist.
In place of the event horizon, Hawking invokes an “apparent horizon”, a surface along which light rays attempting to rush away from the black hole’s core will be suspended. In general relativity, for an unchanging black hole, these two horizons are identical, because light trying to escape from inside a black hole can reach only as far as the event horizon and will be held there, as though stuck on a treadmill. However, the two horizons can, in principle, be distinguished. If more matter gets swallowed by the black hole, its event horizon will swell and grow larger than the apparent horizon.
Conversely, in the 1970s, Hawking also showed that black holes can slowly shrink, spewing out 'Hawking radiation'. In that case, the event horizon would, in theory, become smaller than the apparent horizon. Hawking’s new suggestion is that the apparent horizon is the real boundary. “The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes — in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape to infinity,” Hawking writes.
“The picture Hawking gives sounds reasonable,” says Don Page, a physicist and expert on black holes at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, who collaborated with Hawking in the 1970s. “You could say that it is radical to propose there’s no event horizon. But these are highly quantum conditions, and there’s ambiguity about what space-time even is, let alone whether there is a definite region that can be marked as an event horizon.”
Although Page accepts Hawking’s proposal that a black hole could exist without an event horizon, he questions whether that alone is enough to get past the firewall paradox. The presence of even an ephemeral apparent horizon, he cautions, could well cause the same problems as does an event horizon.
Unlike the event horizon, the apparent horizon can eventually dissolve. Page notes that Hawking is opening the door to a scenario so extreme “that anything in principle can get out of a black hole”. Although Hawking does not specify in his paper exactly how an apparent horizon would disappear, Page speculates that when it has shrunk to a certain size, at which the effects of both quantum mechanics and gravity combine, it is plausible that it could vanish. At that point, whatever was once trapped within the black hole would be released (although not in good shape).
If Hawking is correct, there could even be no singularity at the core of the black hole. Instead, matter would be only temporarily held behind the apparent horizon, which would gradually move inward owing to the pull of the black hole, but would never quite crunch down to the centre. Information about this matter would not destroyed, but would be highly scrambled so that, as it is released through Hawking radiation, it would be in a vastly different form, making it almost impossible to work out what the swallowed objects once were.
“It would be worse than trying to reconstruct a book that you burned from its ashes,” says Page. In his paper, Hawking compares it to trying to forecast the weather ahead of time: in theory it is possible, but in practice it is too difficult to do with much accuracy.
Polchinski, however, is sceptical that black holes without an event horizon could exist in nature. The kind of violent fluctuations needed to erase it are too rare in the Universe, he says. “In Einstein’s gravity, the black-hole horizon is not so different from any other part of space,” says Polchinski. “We never see space-time fluctuate in our own neighbourhood: it is just too rare on large scales.”
Raphael Bousso, a theoretical physicist at the University of California, Berkeley, and a former student of Hawking's, says that this latest contribution highlights how “abhorrent” physicists find the potential existence of firewalls. However, he is also cautious about Hawking’s solution. “The idea that there are no points from which you cannot escape a black hole is in some ways an even more radical and problematic suggestion than the existence of firewalls,” he says. "But the fact that we’re still discussing such questions 40 years after Hawking’s first papers on black holes and information is testament to their enormous significance."
Stephen Hawking's New Black Hole Theory: Scientists Remain Unconvinced An artist’s impression of a supermassive black hole at the centre surrounded by matter flowing onto the black hole in what is termed an accretion disk. Also shown is an outflowing jet of energetic particles, believed to be powered by the black hole's spin. January 28, 2014 http://www.space.com/24454-stephen-hawking-black-hole-theory.html [with embedded video, and comments]
--
Stephen Hawking’s Blunder on Black Holes Shows Danger of Listening to Scientists, Says Bachmann
Photograph by Alex Wong/Getty
Posted by Andy Borowitz January 27, 2014
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report [ http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/ ])—Dr. Stephen Hawking’s recent statement that the black holes he famously described do not actually exist underscores “the danger inherent in listening to scientists,” Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota) said today.
Rep. Bachmann unleashed a blistering attack on Dr. Hawking, who earlier referred to his mistake on black holes as his “biggest blunder.”
“Actually, Dr. Hawking, our biggest blunder as a society was ever listening to people like you,” said Rep. Bachmann. “If black holes don’t exist, then other things you scientists have been trying to foist on us probably don’t either, like climate change and evolution.”
Rep. Bachmann added that all the students who were forced to learn about black holes in college should now sue Dr. Hawking for a full refund. “Fortunately for me, I did not take any science classes in college,” she said.
Bachmann’s anti-Hawking comments seemed to be gaining traction on Capitol Hill, as seen from the statement by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), Chairman of the House Science Committee, who said, “Going forward, members of the House Science Committee will do our best to avoid listening to scientists.”
This is the Errol Morris documentary [1991 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Brief_History_of_Time_(film) {add the close parenthesis at the end to the url when opened to get the correct Wiki page})] about Stephen Hawking, named after Stephen's book, A Brief History of Time. It's a brilliant documentary, scored by Philip Glass, that was never released on DVD in the U.S. and is not otherwise available through Netflix streaming, Blockbuster online, Hulu, iTunes, etc. (There's a Dutch DVD, which may or may not be licensed, but that's all I know of.)
Easy to understand evidence for a common ape-like human/chimp ancestor. One of thousands of collaborating pieces of evidence, but this one is very conceptual. Whip it out anytime a creationist starts preaching.
Ken Miller's talk on Intelligent Design at Case Western University. Ken Miller basically rips Intelligent Design apart in a 2 hour long exposé of the claims of intelligent design and the tactics that creationists employ to get it shoehorned into the American school system.
The Root of All Evil?, later retitled The God Delusion, is a television documentary written and presented by Richard Dawkins in which he argues that humanity would be better off without religion or belief in God.
The documentary was first broadcast in January 2006, in the form of two 45-minute episodes (excluding advertisement breaks), on Channel 4 in the UK.
Dawkins has said that the title The Root of All Evil? was not his preferred choice, but that Channel 4 had insisted on it to create controversy. The sole concession from the producers on the title was the addition of the question mark. Dawkins has stated that the notion of anything being the root of all evil is ridiculous. Dawkins' book The God Delusion, released in September 2006, goes on to examine the topics raised in the documentary in greater detail. The documentary was rebroadcast on the More4 channel on the 25th August 2010 under the title of The God Delusion.
I downloaded this video from the now defunct Google Video and uploaded here so it's archived and isn't lost after Google Video deletes all it's content. Original description below:
This is a presentation [from November, 2006] on science, religion, and how poorly-designed humans, the Earth, and the universe really are. The presenter, Neil deGrasse Tyson, is the new host of the PBS-TV program "NOVA scienceNOW", director of the Hayden Planetarium in the Rose Center For Earth and Space at the American Museum of Natural History. He is the recipient of seven honorary doctorates and the NASA Distinguished Public Service Medal.
Have you ever seen Bill O'Reilly so scared to give an educated guest time to speak?
Watch as he barely gives the space or time to let Dawkins really speak. Watch as he makes a joke when there's a question he can't answer. Uncomfortable fear from Bill.
The Enemies of Reason is a two-part television documentary, written and presented by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, in which he seeks to expose "those areas of belief that exist without scientific proof, yet manage to hold the nation under their spell", including mediumship, acupuncture and psychokinesis.
The documentary was first broadcast on Channel 4 in the UK, styled as a loose successor to Dawkins' documentary of the previous year, The Root of All Evil?, as seen through the incorporation of brief clips from said documentary during the introduction of the first part by Dawkins. The first part aired 13 August 2007 and the second on 20 August 2007.
It includes interviews with Steve Fuller, Deepak Chopra, Satish Kumar, and Derren Brown.
"I was born in New York City and shortly afterward moved to Toronto, spending my childhood in Canada. I received undergraduate degrees in mathematics and physics from Carleton University, and a Ph.D. from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1982.
After a stint in the Harvard Society of Fellows, I became an assistant professor at Yale University in 1985 and Associate Professor in 1988. I moved in 1993 to become Ambrose Swasey Professor of Physics, professor of astronomy, and Chairman of the Physics Department at Case Western Reserve University. In August 2008 I joined the faculty at Arizona State University as Foundation Professor in the School of Earth and Space Exploration and the Department of Physics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and Director of the University's Origins Initiative. In 2009 we inaugurated this initiative with the Origins Symposium [ http://origins.asu.edu ] in which 80 of the world's leading scientists participated, and 3000 people attended.
I write regularly for national media, including The New York Times, the Wall St. Journal, Scientific American (for which I wrote a regular column last year), and other magazines, as well as doing extensive work on radio and television. I am strongly committed to public understanding of science, and have helped lead the national effort to preserve sound science teaching, including the teaching of evolution. I also served on Barack Obama's 2008 Presidential campaign science policy committee. In 2008 I became co-chair of the Board of Sponsors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and in 2010 was elected to the Board of Directors of the Federation of American Scientists.
I became a scientist in part because I read books by other scientists, such as Albert Einstein, George Gamow, Sir James Jeans, etc, when I was a child, and my popular writing returns the favor. One of my greatest joys is when a young person comes up to me and tells me that one of my books motivated them to become a scientist.
I believe science is not only a vital part of our culture, but is fun, and I try and convey that in my books and lectures. I am honored that Scientific American referred to me as a rare scientific public intellectual, and that all three three major US Physics Societies: the American Physical Society, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the American Institute of Physics, have seen fit to honor me with their highest awards for research and writing.
My research focuses on the beginning and end of the Universe. Among my contributions to the field of cosmology, I helped lead the search for dark matter, and first proposed the existence of dark energy in 1995."
During Richard Dawkins' American tour in March 2009, he gave a talk titled "The Purpose of Purpose". I travelled with Richard to these cities and filmed the talks, which I've edited together here. The content of the talk remains intact, while the editing moves between the different locations and Richard's Keynote presentation.
Produced by The Richard Dawkins Foundation and R. Elisabeth Cornwell
An out of this world event, Cosmic Quandaries, held at The Palladium in St. Petersburg at 7 p.m. on Wednesday, March 26th drew in an audience of nearly 800! With a one in a million chance of meeting one of only 6,000 astrophysicists in the world, audience members were lined up in order to have the opportunity to ask Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson a question on any and all galactic wonders they may have.
A discussion about science, society, and the universe with Stephen Colbert, who is out of character, at the Kimberley Academy in Montclair, New Jersey, in January of 2010.
"Two titans of the religious spectrum famed Atheist Christopher Hitchens and esteemed Catholic apologetic Dinesh D'Souza clash in public debate at the University of Notre Dame.
Sponsored in part by The College of Arts and Letters: The Henkels Lecturer Series, The Center for Philosophy of Religion and the Institute for Scholarship in the Liberal Arts."
The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science ( http://richarddawkins.net ) presents: "The Poetry of Science: Discussions of the Beauty of Science."
Two of science's luminaries converse on the beauty of science. Neil deGrasse Tyson, astrophysicist and host of NOVA and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins will explore the wonders of the Cosmos and of Life, its origins, its inspirations, and why science is not just an option, it is the only reality we possess.
On November 6th, 2010 a panel of renowned scientists, philosophers, and public intellectuals gathered to discuss what impact evolutionary theory and advances in neuroscience might have on traditional concepts of morality. If human morality is an evolutionary adaptation and if neuroscientists can identify specific brain circuitry governing moral judgment, can scientists determine what is, in fact, right and wrong? The panelists were psychologist Steven Pinker, author Sam Harris, philosopher Patricia Churchland, physicist Lawrence Krauss, philosopher Simon Blackburn, bioethicist Peter Singer and The Science Network [ http://thesciencenetwork.org/ ]'s Roger Bingham.
The first point relates to creationists claiming the bible is scientific (with an interview with a 'Vatican Astronomer' who talks a lot of sense) and the second graphically demonstrates the lack of originality in the story of Jesus.
Monotremes seem to have branched off from placental and marsupial mammals way back on the tree of life, and possess some reptilian and avian attributes that no other mammals have.
From Curiosity (TV series) Episode 1: Did God create the universe? [original air date August 7, 2011 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_(TV_series) {add the close parenthesis at the end to the url when opened to get the correct Wiki page}]
Meet the Man Christ Jesus - God in His Second Coming: Jose Luis De Jesus (666)
In exactly 293 days from today - September 11, 2011 - He will transform into immortality and those who are marked with the number of His name, 666, will not be harmed from world disasters.
HOUSTON, TEXAS -- As the Earth's birth pains increase in preparation for the soon Transformation of The Man Christ Jesus (Jose Luis De Jesus) and His powerful people, the extreme radiation leakages in Japan are of particular great significance to His kingdom. In this week's live Tracing, The Man Christ Jesus disclosed for the first time detailed evidence of how the Chosen people of 666 will transform into immortal bodies made of substance much like radioactive material in 448 days or less.
With over 103 countries simultaneously tuning into His Weekly Address, the world gained insight on how death will be absorbed by immortality as His Chosen dress in incorruptibility (1 Cor. 15:53) and will fly like clouds (Isaiah 60:8).
In fact, the new bodies of the Lord's Firstfruits will be like a flame of fire (Heb 1:7) made of atomic power.
"Radiation won't harm the Elect of the Kingdom 666, but rather our bodies will absorb that radiation since our new clothing will be made of materials like fire, atoms... and radioactive material" revealed Jose Luis, The Lord.
"While radiation produces death for those that are not sealed 666, none of that will harm us," He continued. "People today are fearful [of rising radiation levels], but we are not. After all, it is what our new transformed bodies will be made of -- radioactivity and power. We will be powerful beings."
Soon the world will see the All-mighty body of Jose Luis De Jesus transformed. For behold, the LORD, Jose Luis, will come in fire, to render his anger in fury (Isaiah 66:15). And all those who have dared to confront Him or doubt, astonished by His Omnipotence and Splendour, will undoubtedly say:
"Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?" (Rev 13:4)
The Great Day is near. 447 days or less.
ABOUT MINISTERIO INTERNACIONAL CRECIENDO EN GRACIA Ministerio Creciendo en Gracia [Growing in Grace Ministry] is God's Government on Earth established by God Himself in His Second Coming, Jose Luis De Jesus (The Man Christ Jesus). Established in 1986, His government now expands into 30 nations with 455 centers, 250 TV programs, 180 radio programs and a satellite channel transmitted by more than 550 cable companies in 16 countries. It is written that 'All Eyes Shall See' and thus, His signal can be seen globally 24 hours a day, 7 days a week through His channel Telegracia. Please visit us at www.cegenglish.com.
MEDIA INQUIRIES North America: Axel Cooley Tel: (305) 433-6966
axel@creciendoengracia.com
Central America: Jeannette Brennes Tel: (506) 8335-3666 prensacostarica@creciendoengracia.com
An interview that really indicates what the rational are up against with creationists.
The interviewer asks how we were able to go to the toilet if we evolved, and did we bump into things for millions of years whilst waiting for eyes to evolve!!!
This is a level of stupidity and misunderstanding that is virtually impossible to understand.
Perhaps as Bill Hick's pointed out years ago, maybe Creationists are not as evolved as the rest of us!
...
Richard Dawkins' initial interview with Howard Conder, the founder of Revelation TV. Richard, has kindly agreed to return to Revelation TV studios for further debates with Creationists; in this interview discusses some of his evolutionary views.
Join critically-acclaimed author and evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins and world-renowned theoretical physicist and author Lawrence Krauss as they discuss biology, cosmology, religion, and a host of other topics.
The authors will also discuss their new books. Dawkins recently published The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True [ http://www.amazon.com/The-Magic-Reality-Whats-Really/dp/1451675046 ], an exploration of the magic of discovery embodied in the practice of science. Written for all age groups, the book moves forward from historical examples of supernatural explanations of natural phenomena to focus on the actual science behind how the world works.
Krauss's latest book, A Universe from Nothing: Why There is Something Rather than Nothing [ http://www.amazon.com/Universe-Nothing-There-Something-Rather/dp/1451624468 ], explains the scientific advances that provide insight into how the universe formed. Krauss tackles the age-old assumption that something cannot arise from nothing by arguing that not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing.
Founded in 2008, the ASU Origins Project is a university-wide transdisciplinary initiative aimed at facilitating cutting edge research and inquiry about origins questions, enhancing public science literacy, and improving science education. Since its inception, the Origins Project has brought the world's leading scientists, including Nobel Prize winners, to Tempe to explore origins questions. The Origins Project has hosted workshops and public events that have focused on questions as fundamental as the origin of the universe, how life began, the origins of human uniqueness, and the origins of morality.
Jesus Camp is a 2006 documentary directed by Rachel Grady and Heidi Ewing about a pentecostal summer camp for children who spend their summers learning and practicing their "prophetic gifts" and being taught that they can "take back America for Christ."
Deep in Siberia's Taiga forest is Vissarion, a cult leader who looks like Jesus and claims to be the voice of God. He's known as "the Teacher" to his 4,000 followers, who initially seem surprisingly normal. Over time, however, their unflinching belief in UFOs and the Earth's imminent demise made this group start to look more and more like some sort of strange cult.
Hosted by Rocco Castoro | Originally released in 2011 at http://vice.com
Matthew 24 - Watch out that no one deceives you for many will claim I am the Christ and fool many.
At long last, Jesus Christ and Mary Magdalene have returned. Or at least that's what one Australian couple wants you to think.
Cult watchers are keeping a close eye on the pair, actually named Alan John Miller and Mary Suzanne Luck, who under the title "Divine Truth" claim to be the second coming of the biblical figures.
"Just a little over 2000 years ago, we arrived on the Earth for the first time," Miller says on his website. "Because of my personal desire and passion for God, as I grew, I recognized not only that I was the Messiah that was foretold by ancient prophets, but also that I was in a process designed by God that all humans could follow, if they so desired."
Miller, 47, and Luck, 32, have drawn in between 30 and 40 disciples since moving to the Wilkesdale region of Queensland in 2007, the Courier Mail reports.
"I don't want to be Jesus. Who wants to be Jesus?" Miller told his followers. "But I love the divine truth."
Australia's Cult Awareness and Information Centre and the Anglican and Catholic churches are concerned that the couple, relying on supporter donations to sustain themselves, appeals to the vulnerable.
"The moment someone becomes God or God's voice on Earth, it gives them another level of authority to enforce submission to them," Cult Awareness and Information Centre spokeswoman Helen Pomery told the Courier.
Divine reincarnation or not, the holy couple has worked wonders for local real estate. Miller and Luck's move to Wilkesdale reportedly sparked an "unlikely property boom," as their followers aggressively purchased much of the surrounding land.
In 2009, followers pooled together $400,000 to purchase roughly one square mile of land, where they currently hold weekly meetings and plan to build an international visitors center.
Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins on his experience with Darwinism and why creationists "don't know anything."
TRANSCRIPTION:
I think we should look at the history of religion, be fascinated by it, just if you look at the history of art and so on. But I don't think that religion has anything useful to teach us.
One of the main reasons why people are religious is because they are persuaded by the apparent design of living things and that's completely destroyed by Darwin. If you actually read any book by a biologist about evolution, it's hard to see how you could fail to be persuaded of it, the evidence is just absolutely pact. There is no doubt about it. It's not a controversial issue. History is completely certain. It's as certain as the fact that the earth and the other planets, orbit the sun.
More than 40% of the American population, if opinion polls to be believed, think that the world is less than 10,000 years old and that's a shocking figure. It shows deep profound ignorance. It sounds very laudable to teach the controversy, to teach both theories. But there aren't two theories, there is only one theory around, there is only one game in town as far as theory of science is concerned. Of course you get negative reactions from creationists, but who cares about creationists, they don't know anything.
I think it was my father who first introduced me to Darwin and Evolution. I was immensely moved by it and it did start a rollercoaster in a way and then I started to become really quite antireligious after that. I went through a sort of middle ground of what you might call Deism. I think I gave up Christianity before I finally gave up the idea of a sort of creative designer of some kind.
Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Before that you could be an atheist, he was for example, but it was quite difficult because you had no good explanation for why living things look so well designed, Darwin provided that.
There are other reasons for being religious like moral reasons or people sometimes feel they have a personal relationship with God or with Jesus or with Mohammed or whatever it is and that kind of reason for being religious would not in itself be undermined by Darwinism, but it's quite wrong to believe that science reduces humanity, that science somehow gives you a bleak, cold, empty, barren view of the universe and of life, quite the contrary, sounds as enriching and fulfilling.
What's going to happen when I die, if I met god in the unlikely event after I died, I think the first thing I would say is well, which one are you? Are you Zeus? Are you Thor? Are you Baal? Are you Mithras? Are you Yahweh? Which god are you? And why did you take such great pains to conceal yourself and to hide away from us?
Christians often ask people like Dawkins, "What if God IS real, and you didn't believe?" This is my exploration of how absurd that unlikely situation might look like, when Dawkins meets the God who has been either unable or unwilling to account for himself objectively.
Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. According to Bill Nye, aka "the science guy," if grownups want to "deny evolution and live in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because we need them."
-- Transcript:
Denial of evolution is unique to the United States. I mean, we're the world's most advanced technological—I mean, you could say Japan—but generally, the United States is where most of the innovations still happens. People still move to the United States. And that's largely because of the intellectual capital we have, the general understanding of science. When you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in that, it holds everybody back, really.
Evolution is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology. It's like, it's very much analogous to trying to do geology without believing in tectonic plates. You're just not going to get the right answer. Your whole world is just going to be a mystery instead of an exciting place.
As my old professor, Carl Sagan, said, "When you're in love you want to tell the world." So, once in a while I get people that really—or that claim—they don't believe in evolution. And my response generally is "Well, why not? Really, why not?" Your world just becomes fantastically complicated when you don't believe in evolution. I mean, here are these ancient dinosaur bones or fossils, here is radioactivity, here are distant stars that are just like our star but they're at a different point in their lifecycle. The idea of deep time, of this billions of years, explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your world view just becomes crazy, just untenable, itself inconsistent.
And I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that's completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that's fine, but don't make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can—we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems.
It's just really hard a thing, it's really a hard thing. You know, in another couple of centuries that world view, I'm sure, will be, it just won't exist. There's no evidence for it.
Directed / Produced by Jonathan Fowler and Elizabeth Rodd
Dr. David Menton and Dr. Georgia Purdom respond to Bill Nye's comments in a recent YouTube video entitled, "Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children" ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU[just above])
The president/CEO and founder of Answers in Genesis--U.S. and the Creation Museum, Ken Ham, responds to Bill Nye's recent YouTube video entitled, "Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children" ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHbYJfwFgOU[second above])
(This is a slightly revised version of the original, with a few key shots improved for accuracy and flow.)
On October 5th, 2012, Seth Andrews joined a group of skeptics for a tour of Kentucky's infamous Creation Museum. These are the Top Ten Lessons he took away from that experience.
On June 22nd, 2013 at Oklahoma City's Cox Convention Center, over 500 gathered for the 2013 Oklahoma Freethought Convention (FREEOK). Speakers included Sean Faircloth, Dale McGowan, Emily Boyer, Zack Kopplin, Seth Andrews and Lawrence Krauss. (Jamila Bey was scheduled but could not attend due to a conflict. She dialed into the conference A/V system, but her presentation could not be recorded for the YouTube videos.)
FREEOK 2013 was sponsored by the American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Oklahoma Atheists.
On June 22nd, 2013 at Oklahoma City's Cox Convention Center, over 500 gathered for the 2013 Oklahoma Freethought Convention (FREEOK). Speakers included Sean Faircloth, Dale McGowan, Emily Boyer, Zack Kopplin, Seth Andrews and Lawrence Krauss. (Jamila Bey was scheduled but could not attend due to a conflict. She dialed into the conference A/V system, but her presentation could not be recorded for the YouTube videos.)
FREEOK 2013 was sponsored by the American Humanist Association, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, and Oklahoma Atheists.
The question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" has been asked for millennia by people who argue for a creator of our universe. Taking a trip back to the beginning of the beginning and the end of the end—and reviewing the remarkable developments in cosmology and particle physics over the past 40 years that have revolutionized our picture of the universe—Lawrence M. Krauss explores the discoveries that have revolutionized our understanding of both nothing and something. It has become clear that not only can our universe naturally arise from nothing, without supernatural shenanigans, but that it probably did.
Hawking is the extraordinary story of the planet's most famous living scientist, told for the first time in his own words and by those closest to him. Made with unique access to Hawking's private life, this is an intimate and moving journey into Stephen's world, both past and present. An inspirational portrait of an iconic figure, Hawking relates his incredible personal journey from boyhood under-achiever, to PhD genius, to being diagnosed with Motor Neuron Disease and given just two years to live. Despite the constant threat of death, Hawking manages to make many remarkable scientific discoveries and rises to fame and super-stardom. Hawking - a remarkable man, and a remarkable movie.
Edited Clips from: Real Time with Bill Maher, 10-25-2013, Richard Dawkins, Al Sharpton, Michael Moore, Valerie Plame. Last clip from the "OVERTIME" segment streamed on the internet.
Public Understanding of Science: The Sagan Legacy Continues 01/14/2014 [...] ... And we look forward to the March 2014 rebirth of Cosmos, which will be hosted by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, who is director of New York's Hayden Planetarium, and produced by none other than Sagan enthusiast Seth MacFarlane, the creator of Family Guy. [...] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-m-gentile/public-understanding-of-science-the-sagan-legacy-continues_b_4587934.html [with comments]
--
Neil deGrasse Tyson on the New Cosmos | Moyers & Company
This week on Moyers & Company, Bill talks with the astrophysicist about his redux of the famous Carl Sagan series and why science and science literacy matter in a democracy
This week on Moyers & Company, Bill Moyers concludes his conversation with Neil deGrasse Tyson about why science literacy is critical to the future of our democracy, economy and standing in the world. They also discuss the dangers created by those who would deny scientific fact and block important research.
Is creation a viable model of origins in today's modern, scientific era? Leading creation apologist and bestselling Christian author Ken Ham is joined at the Creation Museum by Emmy Award-winning science educator and CEO of the Planetary Society Bill Nye.
this is the final, concluding part 7 of a multi-part post -- the (linked in the) additional posts to see linked just above relate to various items in the entire multi-part post going back through the string of posts preceding this one, which are:
Senate passes bill encouraging state-level collaboration for military charter schools
Kathleen McGroryKathleen McGrory, Times/Herald Tallahassee Bureau
Tuesday, March 11, 2014 7:39pm
TALLAHASSEE — On the heels of a tug-of-war over a proposed charter school at MacDill Air Force Base, the state Senate on Tuesday approved a bill encouraging military commanders to establish charters. Related News/Archive
The bill allows commanders to "work with the commissioner of education to increase military family student achievement, which may include the establishment of charter schools on military installations."
Similar high-level involvement took place last summer when Gov. Rick Scott's office referred backers of the MacDill charter to a Fort Lauderdale charter school management company.
The charter proposal that resulted later met resistance from the Hillsborough County School District, prompting backers to drop their request. But they plan to refine their application and resubmit it.
The legislative proposal — which passed unanimously in the Senate, and in the House the week before — covers a wide range of military benefits.
It lets veterans pay in-state rates at Florida colleges and universities. It increases funding for continuing education and career certification programs for veterans. Senate President Don Gaetz said its passage would make Florida "the most military-friendly state in the nation."
The charter school provision was added as part of an amendment sponsored by Sen. Garrett Richter, R-Naples.
Democrats were immediately concerned. Some thought the language would let military base commanders work directly with the state to establish new charter schools. Under current law, local school boards must approve new charter schools.
"We all read this as a potential pre-emption of local school boards," said Sen. Dwight Bullard, D-Miami.
Sen. Bill Montford, a Tallahassee Democrat and CEO of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents, said he raised the issue with Richter.
"We've been assured by the sponsor that this bill would not change the charter school approval process," Montford said.
Still, Montford said he planned to keep tabs on how the language was applied moving forward. "The language is vague," he said.
Sen. John Legg, a Trinity Republican who chairs the Senate Education Committee, said the provision was not intended as a way to circumvent local school boards, but conceded he hadn't "looked at the nuances."
"I don't know that it is a work-around," Legg said. "I think it creates a better way for base commanders to work with boards, with the department (of education) and the commissioner serving as a conduit."
Language encouraging charter schools on military bases also was added to a different Senate bill that requires school districts to create technology plans.
By law, charters are supposed to originate from individuals or approved organizations, typically nonprofits. Districts approve the schools and provide minimal oversight. Arms-length relationships with the management firms make sure the schools serve students and not businesses.
When a district turns down a charter — as Hillsborough did at MacDill — the applicant can appeal to the state. The State Board of Education, which is appointed by the governor, has the final say.
The bill approved Tuesday does not contradict those rules. Although the state supervises the military collaboration, "the applicable school district shall operate and maintain control over any school that is established on the military installation," it says.
Richter said the bill does not affect the Hillsborough situation either.
Arguments about the MacDill plan centered largely around the relationship between the nonprofit Florida Charter Educational Foundation, which submitted the application, and Charter Schools USA, a for-profit management company almost entirely owned by Scott supporter Jonathan Hage.
During the appeal, Hillsborough argued that the application was improper because the plan originated with Scott and the for-profit company. Scott's office had referred MacDill officials to Charter Schools USA, and the foundation got involved later.
The foundation announced last week it was dropping its appeal and would reapply later.
"What we're hearing as a result of MacDill is that base commanders have unique needs for students, and this is one way to try to address it," Legg said.
The bill will now head to Scott. "I think it's a great bill, and I look forward to signing it," he said.
Times staff writers Tia Mitchell and Marlene Sokol contributed to this report.
Senate passes bill encouraging state-level collaboration for military charter schools 03/11/14 [Last modified: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 11:27pm]
.. it's not really connected today, but the story reminded me of the stoush over the Christian markings on the military guns, which then i couldn't find ..
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
