The Rapture Verdict Seed Vault Get Prepared Now Preppers Blueprint Life strawBeginning Of The End
Gold Buying Guide: Golden Eagle Coins

Recent Posts


Food for liberty
Michael and Meranda The Watch

Michael’s Latest Video

Legacy Water

Stephen Hawking: There is no God and the theory of evolution better explains the origin of life

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterPin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

Stephen Hawking - Public DomainFor someone that is supposedly so “brilliant”, Stephen Hawking really doesn’t have a clue.  In a recent interview with Spain’s El Mundo, Hawking publicly declared that God doesn’t exist, that he is an atheist, and that science provides a better explanation of where the universe came from than the Bible does.  While I certainly respect much of the great work that Hawking has done throughout the years, I don’t think that he has thought through these issues very clearly.  As you will see below, it takes a ridiculous amount of blind faith to believe that the theory of evolution is true, and the cold, hard evidence clearly points to a Creator.  Unfortunately, to be a respected member of the scientific establishment today one must fully embrace an evolutionary model for the origin of life, and at this point Stephen Hawking has left no doubt as to where he stands.

Somehow most of us have become convinced that it is not “intellectual” to believe that God created all things.  And a big reason for this is due to the public pronouncements of big name scientists such as Hawking.  The following excerpt comes from an article that was posted on, and I was very disappointed when I first read this…

He gave an interview to Spain’s El Mundo in which he expressed his firm belief that el mundo was the work of scientifically explainable phenomena, not of a supreme being.

Hawking said: “Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation.”

I’m not sure whether there was a specific moment in which science overtook the deistic explanation of existence. However, El Mundo pressed him on the suggestion in “A Brief History of Time” that a unifying theory of science would help mankind “know the mind of God.”

Hawking now explained: “What I meant by ‘we would know the mind of God’ is, we would know everything that God would know, if there were a God. Which there isn’t. I’m an atheist.”

He added: “Religion believes in miracles, but these aren’t compatible with science.”

In the end, Hawking can believe whatever he wants to believe, but he should at least be honest about the fact that he is making a faith choice as well.

You see, the truth is that the theory of evolution is not backed up by hard science.  I will go into this much more below.  In fact, when you choose to “believe” in evolution, you are doing so in spite of the evidence.

So why would anyone do this?

Why would anyone believe something as ridiculous as the theory of evolution?

Well, in my experience most people believe exactly what they want to believe.  And what Stephen Hawking apparently wants to believe is that there is no God and that our existence is some sort of great cosmic accident.

Recently someone asked Coach Dave Daubenmire if he “believed” in evolution, and after reflecting on that question for a while he wrote an entire article in which he shared his thoughts on the matter.  The following excerpt is the part that I enjoyed the most…

Why did he ask me if I “believed” in evolution? I thought evolution was, ahem, settled science. Science, I had always been taught, was based on the scientific method and the veracity of the topic was no longer in doubt. Examples began to rumble through my head.

Why has no one ever asked me if I “believed” in gravity? Do you “believe” in darkness? Does one “believe” in grass? Do you “believe” in the wind? Does one “believe” in fire?” Of course not. Seeing is believing, they tell us. Fire proves itself. So does gravity, and wind, and grass. If macro-evolution is true, why did my friend ask me if I “believed” in it?

We are taught that it takes faith to “believe” in God, or angels, or your spouse. But the truth is; faith is required in order to ‘believe” anything. Christianity is a religion that requires faith to believe. So are Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, Islam, and Santa Claus.

But evolution and climate change are religions as well. Macro-evolution is a faith-based belief system regarding the origins of the species. Global warming is a faith-based system regarding the ebb and flow of the climate. Macro-evolution and climate change are far less fact-based than a belief in Jesus.

But these days, many prominent religious leaders are caving in to the immense pressure from the scientific community to accept the theory of evolution.  For example, Pope Francis has made headlines all over the globe for publicly embracing the Big Bang and the theory of evolution.  The following are some of the Pope’s statements that have appeared in newspapers worldwide

-“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”

-“The Big Bang, which today we hold to be the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of the divine creator but, rather, requires it.”

-“Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

In 2015, most people consider the Pope to be the number one representative of the Christian faith on the entire planet, and so it is quite alarming that he is making statements such as these.

Other prominent members of the Catholic clergy are making even stronger statements.

For instance, the head of the Vatican Observatory says that a belief in young earth creationism is “almost blasphemous theology”

As previously reported, earlier this month, Guy Consolmagno with the Vatican Observatory told Australia’s Fairfax Media that young earth creation beliefs are nearly tantamount to blasphemy.

“It’s almost blasphemous theology,” Consolmagno alleged, according to the Brisbane Times. “It’s certainly not the tradition of Catholicism and never has been and it misunderstands what the Bible is and it misunderstands what science is.”


I simply do not understand how anyone can look at the evidence and come to that sort of conclusion.

Just look at our DNA.  It is a self-replicating information system that utilizes a code that is so incredibly complex that we are only just now starting to understand it a little bit.  The amount of information that would be contained in just one pinhead of DNA would completely fill a stack of books that could stretch from our planet to the moon about 500 times.

So where did such a complex and remarkably efficient information system come from?

DNA is both a code and a language, and the truth is that codes and languages don’t just pop into existence out of nothing.  There is always an intellect behind every code and every language.

So where did DNA come from, and who designed it?

This is just one of the exceedingly important questions that evolutionists do not have an answer for.

For those that are interested in learning more, I would like to share a list of 44 points about the creation vs. evolution debate that I included in a previous article.  Unless you have really looked into these things on your own, you may have never encountered some of these points before.  The next time that someone tries to convince you that evolution isn’t just a fairy tale for adults, share this list with them…

#1 If the theory of evolution was true, we should have discovered millions upon millions of transitional fossils that show the development of one species into another species. Instead, we have zero.

#2 When Charles Darwin came up with his theory, he admitted that no transitional forms had been found at that time, but he believed that huge numbers certainly existed and would eventually be discovered

“Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?”

#3 Even some of the most famous evolutionists in the world acknowledge the complete absence of transitional fossils in the fossil record. For example, Dr. Colin Patterson, former senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History and author of “Evolution” once wrote the following

“I fully agree with your comments about the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them …. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument.”

#4 Stephen Jay Gould, Professor of Geology and Paleontology at Harvard University, once wrote the following about the lack of transitional forms…

“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.”

#5 Evolutionist Stephen M. Stanley of Johns Hopkins University has also commented on the stunning lack of transitional forms in the fossil record…

“In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another.”

#6 If “evolution” was happening right now, there would be millions of creatures out there with partially developed features and organs.  But instead there are none.

#7 If the theory of evolution was true, we should not see a sudden explosion of fully formed complex life in the fossil record. Instead, that is precisely what we find.

#8 Paleontologist Mark Czarnecki, an evolutionist, once commented on the fact that complex life appears very suddenly in the fossil record…

“A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth’s geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin’s hypothetical intermediate variants – instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.”

#9 The sudden appearance of complex life in the fossil record is so undeniable that even Richard Dawkins has been forced to admit it…

“It is as though they [fossils] were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists. Both schools of thought (Punctuationists and Gradualists) despise so-called scientific creationists equally, and both agree that the major gaps are real, that they are true imperfections in the fossil record. The only alternative explanation of the sudden appearance of so many complex animal types in the Cambrian era is divine creation and both reject this alternative.”

#10 Nobody has ever observed macroevolution take place in the laboratory or in nature.  In other words, nobody has ever observed one kind of creature turn into another kind of creature.  The entire theory of evolution is based on blind faith.

#11 Evolutionist Jeffrey Schwartz, a professor of anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh, openly admits that “the formation of a new species, by any mechanism, has never been observed.

#12 Even evolutionist Stephen J. Gould of Harvard University has admitted that the record shows that species do not change. The following is how he put it during a lecture at Hobart & William Smith College

“Every paleontologist knows that most species don’t change. That’s bothersome….brings terrible distress. ….They may get a little bigger or bumpier but they remain the same species and that’s not due to imperfection and gaps but stasis. And yet this remarkable stasis has generally been ignored as no data. If they don’t change, its not evolution so you don’t talk about it.”

#13 Anyone that believes that the theory of evolution has “scientific origins” is fooling themselves.  It is actually a deeply pagan religious philosophy that can be traced back for thousands of years.

#14 Anything that we dig up that is supposedly more than 250,000 years old should have absolutely no detectable radiocarbon in it whatsoever.  But instead, we find it in everything that we dig up – even dinosaur bones.  This is clear evidence that the “millions of years” theory is simply a bunch of nonsense

It’s long been known that radiocarbon (which should disappear in only a few tens of thousands of years at the most) keeps popping up reliably in samples (like coal, oil, gas, etc.) which are supposed to be ‘millions of years’ old. For instance, CMI has over the years commissioned and funded the radiocarbon testing of a number of wood samples from ‘old’ sites (e.g. with Jurassic fossils, inside Triassic sandstone, burnt by Tertiary basalt) and these were published (by then staff geologist Dr Andrew Snelling) in Creation magazine and Journal of Creation. In each case, with contamination eliminated, the result has been in the thousands of years, i.e. C-14 was present when it ‘shouldn’t have been’. These results encouraged the rest of the RATE team to investigate C-14 further, building on the literature reviews of creationist M.D. Dr Paul Giem.

In another very important paper presented at this year’s ICC, scientists from the RATE group summarized the pertinent facts and presented further experimental data. The bottom line is that virtually all biological specimens, no matter how ‘old’ they are supposed to be, show measurable C-14 levels. This effectively limits the age of all buried biota to less than (at most) 250,000 years.

#15 The odds of even a single sell “assembling itself” by chance are so low that they aren’t even worth talking about.  The following is an excerpt from Jonathan Gray’s book entitled “The Forbidden Secret“…

Even the simplest cell you can conceive of would require no less than 100,000 DNA base pairs and a minimum of about 10,000 amino acids, to form the essential protein chain. Not to mention the other things that would also be necessary for the first cell.

Bear in mind that every single base pair in the DNA chain has to have the same molecular orientation (“left-hand” or “right hand”)? As well as that, virtually all the amino acids must have the opposite orientation. And every one must be without error.

“Now,” explained Larry, “to randomly obtain those correct orientations, do you know your chances? It would be 1 chance in 2110,000, or 1 chance in 1033,113!

“To put it another way, if you attempted a trillion, trillion, trillion combinations every second for 15 billion years, the odds you would achieve all the correct orientations would still only be one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion … and the trillions would continue 2755 times!

“It would be like winning more than 4700 state lotteries in a row with a single ticket purchased for each. In other words…impossible.”

#16 How did life learn to reproduce itself?  This is a question that evolutionists do not have an answer for.

#17 In 2007, fishermen caught a very rare creature known as a Coelacanth.  Evolutionists originally told us that this “living fossil” had gone extinct 70 million years ago.  It turns out that they were only off by 70 million years.

#18 According to evolutionists, the Ancient Greenling Damselfly last showed up in the fossil record about 300 million years ago.  But it still exists today.  So why hasn’t it evolved at all over that time frame?

#19 Darwinists believe that the human brain developed without the assistance of any designer.  This is so laughable it is amazing that there are any people out there that still believe this stuff.  The truth is that the human brain is amazingly complex.  The following is how a PBS documentary described the complexity of the human brain: “It contains over 100 billion cells, each with over 50,000 neuron connections to other brain cells.”

#20 The following is how one evolutionist pessimistically assessed the lack of evidence for the evolution of humanity…

“Even with DNA sequence data, we have no direct access to the processes of evolution, so objective reconstruction of the vanished past can be achieved only by creative imagination.”

#21 Perhaps the most famous fossil in the history of the theory of evolution, “Piltdown Man”, turned out to be a giant hoax.

#22 If the neutron were not about 1.001 times the mass of the proton, all protons would have decayed into neutrons or all neutrons would have decayed into protons, and therefore life would not be possible. How can we account for this?

#23 If gravity was stronger or weaker by the slimmest of margins, then life sustaining stars like the sun could not exist. This would also make life impossible. How can we account for this?

#24 Why did evolutionist Dr. Lyall Watson make the following statement?…

“The fossils that decorate our family tree are so scarce that there are still more scientists than specimens. The remarkable fact is that all of the physical evidence we have for human evolution can still be placed, with room to spare, inside a single coffin!”

#25 Apes and humans are very different genetically.  As explains, “the human Y chromosome has twice as many genes as the chimpanzee Y chromosome and the chromosome structures are not at all similar.”

#26 How can we explain the creation of new information that is required for one animal to turn into another animal?  No evolutionary process has ever been shown to be able to create new biological information.  One scientist described the incredible amount of new information that would be required to transform microbes into men this way

“The key issue is the type of change required — to change microbes into men requires changes that increase the genetic information content, from over half a million DNA ‘letters’ of even the ‘simplest’ self-reproducing organism to three billion ‘letters’ (stored in each human cell nucleus).”

#27 Evolutionists would have us believe that there are nice, neat fossil layers with older fossils being found in the deepest layers and newer fossils being found in the newest layers.  This simply is not true at all

The fossil layers are not found in the ground in the nice neat clean order that evolutionists illustrate them to be in their textbooks. There is not one place on the surface of the earth where you may dig straight down and pass through the fossil layers in the order shown in the textbooks. The neat order of one layer upon another does not exist in nature. The fossil bearing layers are actually found out of order, upside down (backwards according to evolutionary theory), missing (from where evolutionists would expect them to be) or interlaced (“younger” and “older” layers found in repeating sequences). “Out of place” fossils are the rule and not the exception throughout the fossil record.

#28 Evolutionists believe that the ancestors of birds developed hollow bones over thousands of generations so that they would eventually be light enough to fly.  This makes absolutely no sense and is beyond ridiculous.

#29 If dinosaurs really are tens of millions of years old, why have scientists found dinosaur bones with soft tissue still in them?  The following is from an NBC News report about one of these discoveries…

For more than a century, the study of dinosaurs has been limited to fossilized bones. Now, researchers have recovered 70 million-year-old soft tissue, including what may be blood vessels and cells, from a Tyrannosaurus rex.

#30 Which evolved first: blood, the heart, or the blood vessels for the blood to travel through?

#31 Which evolved first: the mouth, the stomach, the digestive fluids, or the ability to poop?

#32 Which evolved first: the windpipe, the lungs, or the ability of the body to use oxygen?

#33 Which evolved first: the bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or the muscles to move the bones?

#34 In order for blood to clot, more than 20 complex steps need to successfully be completed. How in the world did that process possibly evolve?

#35 DNA is so incredibly complex that it is absolutely absurd to suggest that such a language system could have “evolved” all by itself by accident…

When it comes to storing massive amounts of information, nothing comes close to the efficiency of DNA. A single strand of DNA is thousands of times thinner than a strand of human hair. One pinhead of DNA could hold enough information to fill a stack of books stretching from the earth to the moon 500 times.

Although DNA is wound into tight coils, your cells can quickly access, copy, and translate the information stored in DNA. DNA even has a built-in proofreader and spell-checker that ensure precise copying. Only about one mistake slips through for every 10 billion nucleotides that are copied.

#36 Can you solve the following riddle by Perry Marshall?…

1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism.

2) All codes are created by a conscious mind; there is no natural process known to science that creates coded information.

3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind.

If you can provide an empirical example of a code or language that occurs naturally, you’ve toppled my proof. All you need is one.

#37 Evolutionists simply cannot explain why our planet is so perfectly suited to support life.

#38 Shells from living snails have been “carbon dated” to be 27,000 years old.

#39 If humans have been around for so long, where are all of the bones and all of the graves?  The following is an excerpt from an article by Don Batten

Evolutionists also claim there was a ‘Stone Age’ of about 100,000 years when between one million and 10 million people lived on Earth. Fossil evidence shows that people buried their dead, often with artefacts—cremation was not practised until relatively recent times (in evolutionary thinking). If there were just one million people alive during that time, with an average generation time of 25 years, they should have buried 4 billion bodies, and many artefacts. If there were 10 million people, it would mean 40 billion bodies buried in the earth. If the evolutionary timescale were correct, then we would expect the skeletons of the buried bodies to be largely still present after 100,000 years, because many ordinary bones claimed to be much older have been found. However, even if the bodies had disintegrated, lots of artefacts should still be found.

#40 Evolutionists claim that just because it looks like we were designed that does not mean that we actually were.  They often speak of the “illusion of design”, but that is kind of like saying that it is an “illusion” that a 747 airplane or an Apple iPhone were designed.  And of course the human body is far more complex that a 747 or an iPhone.

#41 If you want to be part of the “scientific community” today, you must accept the theory of evolution no matter how absurd it may seem to you.  Richard Lewontin of Harvard once made the following comment regarding this harsh reality…

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, . . . in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated commitment to materialism. . . . we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counterintuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

#42 Time Magazine once made the following statement about the lack of evidence for the theory of evolution…

“Yet despite more than a century of digging, the fossil record remains maddeningly sparse. With so few clues, even a single bone that doesn’t fit into the picture can upset everything. Virtually every major discovery has put deep cracks in the conventional wisdom and forced scientists to concoct new theories, amid furious debate.”

#43 Malcolm Muggeridge, the world famous journalist and philosopher, once made the following statement about the absurdity of the theory of evolution…

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.”

#44 In order to believe the theory of evolution, you must have enough blind faith to believe that life just popped into existence from non-life, and that such life just happened to have the ability to take in the nourishment it needed, to expel waste, and to reproduce itself, all the while having everything it needed to survive in the environment in which it suddenly found itself. Do you have that much blind faith?

So what do you believe about the origin of life?

Please feel free to join the debate by posting a comment below…

  • donna

    michael Prof. hawkings is insane. One wonders if subjected to the extraordinary circumstances of his existence whether one would emerge intact. Much is said about Newton and his consciousness interpreted as a mental breakdown. It was not rather an illumination which transformed his views.
    Pray for hawkings he has a similar metanoia

  • Spook89

    It goes like this… “19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

    20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

    21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

    22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

    23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.” Romans 1:19-23

    • Guest

      A very appropriate passage of scripture considering Hawking is a cosmologist! Amen!

  • az

    This will come hard to believe, but I have contact with people who are Gods right hands. They have finally come fwd to confirm our origins and to wake us up to do something about our environment before its too late. They give us 60 years and after that time, pollution will be irreversible. thetheologiansoforion,com

    • Jim Davis


  • iris

    Excellent post, Michael, thank you! I believe God is intimately involved with every aspect of creation and is sustaining all of it, down to the atomic level. He allows disease and death, but only because we chose to rebel as a race against Him, but even the evil which He allows, (for now, it won’t always be the case) serves to draw humans to look for Him and the choices He offers in accepting or rejecting Him and the truths about Him. He is the great I AM, and the god of the living. He offers us eternal life in a reconciled state with Him through Jesus Christ. In the Bible, we’re told that even the demons believe Him, yet tremble, because they know what faces them in the coming judgement. Yet, they too, must serve Him. He has a perfect plan and it will not be thwarted. Time is a human construct, His ways and timing are not our own.

    There is way, way too much patterning in the universe, from the largest galaxies yet found, to the sub atomic level, to indicate that chance is involved in its existence or even more, living matter as we define it. The odds of a human sperm and egg combining, forming a zygote, embryo, fetus and then making it to a live birth delivery are absolutely incredible. A cute, but very good example which confounds those who believe in the theory of macro evolution, is the humble but well armed, bombadier beetle.

    • Doesn’t confound anyone. Are you about 50-60 years behind on your science? Google “Bombardier Beetles and the Argument of Design by Mark Isaak”.

  • K

    I will take Godly wisdom, over human intelligence, any day.

    • iris

      Me, too.

  • 11 major systems in the human body…

    • iris

      all working in tandem, down to the cellular level. It’s incredible, to say the least.

  • Truthseeker

    Stephen Hawking knows God exists, because God has put this in everyone’s heart, according to Romans 1. He is in rebellion against the truth! Sadly, one second after his death, he will be fully aware of Satan’s deception. God help him to open his eyes while he still can.

    • iris


    • C.T. Dixon

      This is a steaming loaf of male bovine fecal material. God and Satan are figments of some ancient tribal imagination.

  • shadows_edge

    Given the fact that he should of died at the age of 6 or something like that. Stephen hawking should fully believe in god given that he himself is a miricle. How else can someone explain how he is still breathing. Sure doesn’t have anything to do with evolution. But i would like to see how hawkings explains his current existance.

    • iris

      good point.

  • DJohn1

    The problem is that species do adapt to living conditions and the species do make alterations in future generations to survive.
    This is not exactly evolution.
    Scientists have changed species by altering the genetic codes.
    We are a prime example of manipulation.
    I find it strange that before the flood people lived very long lives. Some even as long as 900 plus years.
    After the flood, mankind gradually reduced to less than 120 years.
    We now have figured out that every generation of our cells has less data in it. So by the time we are old, we are dealing with a lot less data in the cells than we did at birth.
    Most people have about 50 generations of cells from birth to old age. Some creatures live a lot longer than others. We are not near the record of slow aging.
    As we grow older we change as less and less information is available to regenerate.
    Yet each child starts out with a full compliment of data.
    You are right about one thing. The system is equivalent to a bunch of monkeys typing on typewriters reproducing the entire works of the encyclopedia. It just is not likely to be an accidental creation by the laws of random chance alone.
    And it is not just us. Every animal and plant on the planet has a sophisticated genetic program behind it.
    Right now science is spending a lot of money to try to disprove that what I have said is true. Including a space program looking for life out there.
    What kind of life is out there?
    Will it hold true to life on Earth?
    Will it have a system of genes and chromosomes?
    Or will it be entirely alien and different?
    So far we have no clue as we have found no life beyond Earth.
    Yet I believe life exists on Mars.
    I believe it is likely to exist in the buried oceans on a moon of Jupiter. And if we find fish out there?
    Or if we find some form of rodent on Mars?
    An animal surviving on little atmosphere and with little gravity would have to be different in some ways than us.
    It would have to have a huge lung structure.
    It would have to survive on insects of some kind. Creatures with an exoskeleton might be better suited to life in the sands.
    Possibly deep in the sands of Mars.
    But that would depend on a single source and design for life itself.
    Like maybe a creator?
    I believe that there is life all over the Universe.
    The question is does it have a common origin to ourselves?
    I also believe that most of the area of the Solar System is devoid of life. I think if we find it at all it will be rare.

    • iris

      Evolution theorists are teaching theory as fact, as you say, they have to “evolve” their theory to stay credible. (: As far as life as we would recognize it, being possible in the universe, we just can’t know at this point. God knows. Regarding the theory out there which some insist on, that earth was seeded by aliens, part of me chuckles, but as a Christian, not sure if I’d be surprised if supposedly benevolent beings from other planets might “appear” on earth to “save mankind from our warring, intolerant ways”, but be demons in disguise. The NT says that satan disguises as an angel of light.

    • Gay Veteran

      since we’re on the subject of proof, what proof do you have that people lived for over 900 years?

      • felicityva

        Time, back then, was not measured in 24 hour increments as it is today. So back then, people were known to ‘live’ 300, 600, 900 years. If they were to live in our time now, their years may only be 80, 100 or possibly 110 years.

        • Gay Veteran

          AGAIN, what proof do you have?

  • John Noyb

    Hawking’s intellect has blinded him to the Truth. He believes the lie. 2 Th 2:11 states “And for this reason God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe the lie….”, Sadly, Mr. Hawking is decieved like so many others today as witnessed by many of the comments on your two blogs. How terribly sad not to have any HOPE that there is something far better that awaits all who believe in Jesus!

    • iris

      Agreed! The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. There’s a huge difference between intelligence and wisdom.

  • Sam

    I for one have never been particularly impressed by Hawking’s reported intelligence nor his particular command of critical thought. His intelligence is highly, very highly over-rated. But he is a very sad man.. I feel sorry for him; not for his physical disability; but for his sourness and sadness. Like in the movie Avatar… “Sad…. only sad”.

    • jaxon64

      I met Hawking ( actually a post-lecture gathering) when I was still finishing my studies. He appeared a very angry, bitter man and it appeared as if most of his anger was at the God he professed not to believe in. Hawking must have brought up God and Christianity in particular 4 or 5 times during our groups discussions–even though not asked about these topics.
      Although he is quite famous and has won many, many awards–most of his awards were not granted for actual accomplishments but simply by proposed ( supposed) theories.
      His greatest “achievement” is that he is credited with the discovery that black holes emit radiation. This is fine if it appears to lay to rest some of the entropic theory or repeating universe ideas–however I’ve always felt that it runs counter-intuitive to his multi-verse or bubble universes theories.
      In the end, I think he will theorize and postulate in any way that he can-as long as he can find some new theory to explain creation without a creator.

      • Sam

        And somehow, still manage to make a living while doing it. Sad… only sad.

      • You have no idea what you’re talking about. None of the things you mentioned are remotely accurate.

  • tacoma

    The theory of evolution tells how life on Earth *evolve*. It is a sound, solid proven scientific theory as strong as the most robust theories in physics which modern technological society is based. But it is NOT a theory on life creation. It never claimed to say anything about how life began. Only how it changed. No scientists ever claimed the theory of evolution is the theory of life creation. Today however some research continued to be done of life creation, which then will be a theory of life if successful.

    Science never wanted or need to say anything about god. Because god is just a concept invented by human beings. Defined as anybody wished. This is why there are thousands of gods throughout human history. But what is a god? A god is something or somebody, however defined or designated, people worship, however that worship is done. It’s a symbol, but frequently turned into a powerful tool of control.

    For example in America a lot of people love the gun so much they worship it. So there exists the Gun God in America. Don’t laugh. In India, they have the Cow and Rat Gods. In ancient Egypt they worshiped the Sun God, and many others, for 4000 years. [Well if one have to pick something to worship the Sun is one of the best.] Ancient Greek had gods galore.

    Anybody can simply claim a god created everything in the universe. It mean nor say anything – because it’s just words. In science, everything has to be proven, and proved in a specific, logical and detailed way before it become scientific knowledge. A god however defined can never be proven scientifically and therefore it is not science. After all, if one define god X as the one that created the universe, then one can equally ask what god created god X. The answer of course is god Y. Playing with words is not science.

    I can give you a fine example of science in action. If you fire up your smartphone and run a GPS app, it ‘magically’ knows where you are and can tell you how to navigate. If you do this in the year 1900 everybody on Earth will say a Navigator God is making this happen. But of course there is no such thing. It is just very powerful scientific knowledge at work.

    The more primitive the mind, the more gods they need. The ancients had thousands. Today there are a lot less. Because education have advanced, and scientific knowledge became the most reliable of knowledge. This is why there are more than 10,000 universities granting scientific degrees all over the world.

    • iris

      but a theory is not “solid proven scientific” as you said. And if you read the post in its entirety, think you’ll see that the theory just keeps looking worse as the facts continue to come out. Any college or university which is too afraid or too narrow minded to accept the possibility of intelligent design, has no business issuing science degrees which are based on subscribing to a politically correct view. Notable university professors and other academics are being fired for questioning the current global warming theories or evolution theories, among other issues. Anything goes if one is anti Semitic or anti Christian in some of these “hallowed halls”, but beware, if anyone else gets bullied, failed or offended.

  • Chris Gerber

    I have always thought that God had confounded Steven Hawking because he must think he is so smart that he can defy God. The fact is, with all of his intelligence he is reduced to only denying God, something that doesn’t take a college education to do.

  • Pascal van der Heijden

    Evolution is the creation of God because God is the cosmos or the endless cosmic cycle which turns ”uni and verse”.

    • iris

      You’re contradicting yourself, Pascal. God cannot be the creator of evolution and be the sum of the parts of creation at the same time. He is greater than the sum and controls the laws of math and physics, simply because He wants to, and we are indeed blessed as His creation that He chooses to be so consistent. (: Thanks for capitalizing His name, though.

      • Pascal van der Heijden

        No, I’m cleary contradicting your thoughts. Just read your reaction… ”God cannot be” and ”he controls because he wants to”.

        God is nothing more then a word which is a combining of three letters wich describe three cycles.
        The G is originally a Sanskrit symbol of our ‘’music-symbol G ‘’and is standing for the cycle-wave that the earth makes after she was born out of the sun.
        The O is representing the whole cycle-wave of evolution on our planet.
        The D is the ancient symbol of death which is the humans (or the Devils) task

  • Stephen Robinson

    The problem is that science and faith are not mutally exclusive and Hawking seems to miss that. If I were a creator and I wanted to design a system that continues on for millions of years and along the way imporves itself, well just look all around us, and even evolution has a role to play!

    • Faith cannot be a part of an evidence-based endeavor, actually.

  • Vizar

    The key is what is God and I don’t mean religions as any religion that advocates killing is not of God in my belief. I believe in a God but I am not arrogant enough to pronounce what that means. We have had some 8000 religions but always one God and God is love and good and light. Therefore, almost every religion, perhaps all of them, are failed man-made creations and fabrications (look at religious history) that I believe God has deserted.

    God is good, God does not kill people or send storms and tragedy while killing some and sparing others. God is simply love and if we all learned this fact and acted in God’s image heaven would arrive on earth. But, evil is also real, one cannot argue against the fact. And evil is powerful and we seem to worship it now and in the past, confusing it with God.

    • john lesley

      God doesn’t kill people? Apparently you have never read the Old Testament.

      • HumbleAmerican

        I don’t believe Vizar was referring to the god of the bible, when he/she says god is good, and doesn’t create evil. However, the god of the bible actually does create evil, and kills people.

        Isaiah 45 : 7 I form the light, and create darkness : I make peace, and create evil : I the LORD do all these things.

        And we know of all the deaths that are on that particular gods hands. I, like Vizar, believe in a righteous and truthful being, it just so happens, it’s not the god of the bible.

        • Vizar

          You are correct sir.

      • Vizar

        That is why that book, like so many others written by Man fail.

  • Lazarovic

    I can help; evolution is true, and God is the author of evolution. Now everyone please calm down.

    • iris

      I used to think that too, Lazarovic, even as a Christian, but the more I study God’s word, the more I experience life, and the more the theory of evolution is exposed for what it is saying at heart, including the fallacies now coming out which are involved with it, the more I realize, that if God could be the author/creator of evolution, He also could have created exactly the way He says He did. If He’s God, I can take Him at His word. All I know is what has been revealed to me, I don’t have the right to state that conjecture is fact, and that would be illogical, anyway. And I am quite calm, thanks. God bless.

  • greanfinisher .

    What the Pope said about creation was blasphemous. In fact, Adam was probably the one who chronologued the opening chapter of Genesis, and I’m positive that he was confident that people understood what a ‘Day’ meant. Is anything too wonderful for the Lord?

    • iris

      Agree. All things are possible with God,and He says there are no odds with Him. Yom means a set period of time, usually refers to a 24 hour period, but the text specifically states sunset to sunrise=the first yom, the second, yom,…and on the seventh yom, God rested. And it clearly says that God made Adam from dirt and Eve from his rib, not that He made man from monkeys, in fact, the post above cites a big difference between human and ape DNA.

      He saved my soul, so what can’t He do? (:,

      • greanfinisher .

        My interpretation of Chapter 1 Verse 2 of Genesis was that even before Day 1 of Creation, a primordial Earth had already existed. It was described as dark, formless, void and enveloped in water (and rather deep water at that). In fact, one can surmise here that this primoridial Earth probably beared a rudimentary gravitational field to contain the waters, but not enough to give it form.

        • iris

          Looks like a good interpretation to me! Do you have info to support the theory of a gravitational field that weak, though?

          • greanfinisher .

            None whatsoever. In retrospect, I don’t think that the theory ‘holds water’ (no pun intended).

          • iris

            Well, we weren’t there of course, but we’ll know one of these days. (:

          • greanfinisher .

            Who knows given that particular environment whether any physical laws pertained or not?

    • iris

      This is an aside, but years ago, researchers were playing with the first models of the supercomputers and punched in the known scientific and medical data from women of different races around the world. The supercomputer did its thing, and came to the conclusion that all women have only one woman as a common ancestor.

  • JB

    “…The fool says in his heart, ‘There
    is no God.’ They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is
    no one who does good.” (Psalm 14:1)

    “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all
    the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their
    wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain
    to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the
    creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine
    nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from
    what has been made, so that people are without excuse. For
    although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to
    him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish
    hearts were darkened.” (Romans 1:18-21)

    “…while evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.” (2 Timothy 3:13)

    • Corvus2


  • john lesley

    There are several people on here bashing Hawking for being an atheist. Do you really feel the need to attack his intelligence because he doesn’t share the same beliefs as you? How very “Christian” of you. I can’t say I’m surprised as they attack (verbally) anyone who doesn’t believe in their God. As a fellow atheist, I am in complete agreement with Hawking. A real atheist does not care what you believe. If it comforts you to believe in a supreme being, then by all means, do so. It does not affect my life in any way. How about you worry about your life, and let others worry about theirs. I know how difficult that must be for you, but try. For posting this, I fully expect to be called names and “preached” to, but I don’t care. It needed to be said.

  • krinks

    Professing themselves to be wise they have become fools.

    Add to this evolution is based upon the premise we are all descended from a wet rock. Pass.

  • This Brain thinks some cloud pissed on rocks……………………amoeba came then fish than monkeys then him

  • gm

    The evolution argument reduces to proving that instruction sets of coded information can appear by accident. This fact has never been observed in practice and cannot be simulated by computer. On the contrary all observable evidence tells us that information only ever comes from and intelligent source. In addition information degrades over time, and this is exactly what is happening to the living genome, it is degrading downwards not evolving upwards into something better.

    Each time we need a new species, new specific coded information has to be added. For instance if a reptile has scales and needs feathers to turn into a bird then gigantic amounts of new information have to be added just to produce feathers. We don’t even know how much information a simple feather would take but its far from simple. In fact I’d go so far to say that to produce a simple feather is way beyond the capability of the most advanced human technology.

    Not only that but the coded DNA information is contained in nanotechnology at an atomic molecular level. The living cell contains mollecular machines with such sophistication and genius that it should fill people with shock and awe.

    • iris

      Thank you!!!

    • “This fact has never been observed in practice and cannot be simulated by computer.”

      I’ve got bad news for you: it’s done all the time, and it’s called “evolutionary algorithms.”

  • winnie the pooh

    In the beginning GOD CREATED the heavens and earth…

  • rmc9

    “…the fool says in his heart,’there is no God.'” “the wisdom of this world is foolishness to God…”

  • rawhunger .

    HE has blind faith?! You’re whole thinking on this is based on blind faith on the stories in a book and belief in a invisible man in the sky!!! Who sounds more reasonable to REASONABLE people?!!

  • JackerRaabit

    Just goes to show: atheism rots the mind.

  • Michael Richter

    To be honest: Before He ‘caught’ me, I also thought that the theory of evolution was quite interesting – but, at that time I belived anyway just in NOTHING.
    Today I KNOW that that was/is really pure nonsense and the He – living IN me – really created ‘Heaven on Earth’ for me – despite of all trials allowed by Him for reasons of ‘education’. We just have to look around to see the evidence and “experience Him daily” to realize His love, mercy and the fulfillment of His promises. (I could talk hours about personal experiences with Him)
    Nevertheless the best thing I/we can do – AND please DO, all of you !! – ist to look forward to be with HIM.
    Blessings to all readers

  • Harquebus

    Deities are a man made concept to explain the unknown and install obedience and conformity in those who fear death. Religion is a curse on humanity and the sooner it is relegated to the lunatic fringe where the gullible and foolish belong, the sooner the world will become a better place.

    • With Fortitude

      What do you say to the 44 points Michael makes in his article? I he wrong about any one of them?

      • Harquebus


      • All of them.

        • With Fortitude

          Alright start with # 1

    • James

      Well spoken

  • With Fortitude

    I can’t believe what I’m reading. The Pope actually made these comments about evolution and GOD. Why aren’t other religious leader denouncing what the Pope is saying about this?

    • iris

      So agree! Btw, thank you for serving our country! Our son serves, as well.

      • With Fortitude

        Iris , you’re welcome ; it was an honor to serve. GOD bless your family as well.

        • iris

          Thank you, With Fortitude. God bless you and yours, also!

    • James

      Because this pope is rational.

      • With Fortitude

        Rational in what way?

        • James

          He does not view a book written 3000 years ago by who knows who as the source of information and instead at data, and books published today by non anonymous sources

      • iris

        Disagree. The RCC has always been pc, it is often about empire building using Jesus’ name. Globalism, sustainability and sexuality issues, which are now in the forefront, are simply the latest tools available to attempt that with. I do know Catholics who are born again Christians, and the RCC has many charitable outreaches in the world, but i have big problems with some of their theology and doctrines. i.e., they still only recognize the RCC as the only true Christian church. So I would say, his “rationality” is really about pragmatism. It’s possible therefore, that when the one world religion is the only acceptable form of worship, in which no one can say or practice what they believe unless it’s entirely pc, he will sell out his form of Christianity, in favor of it. The Bible says most of the world will join in this deceptive delusion, and that those who refuse to, will be killed for their belief.

  • johnlaughs@u

    stephen hawkings. the man who has lost quite a few bets with his fellow scientists.
    did you know that SH once believed that black holes couldnt possibly exist?
    i believe he lost a case of beer in that bet.
    now he bets against God.
    except this time the wager is for his soul.

  • James


  • James

    “In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another.

    Obviously you do not understand that evoultion is really simple and say’s that animals that are most adapt to survive to their enviorment will survive, pass on their genes, and over time the gene that is required to survive will become the most common gene.

    Now that we have got this out of the way, lets talk about why we should not make antibiotics because sometimes they are used to treat gonorrhea. (SARC)

    • Simon

      Macro evolution is the inclusion of new, complex genetic information into a gene pool (something that remains unobserved). An example would be the inclusion of information required to construct and operate a wing on an animal that previously never had one.

      It is not simply survival of the fittest, which does exactly the opposite – remove complex information from a gene pool and weaken it through genetic uniformity.

      You really ought to know this stuff.

      Save your sarc and do basic research buddy.

  • James

    But evolution and climate change are religions as well. Macro-evolution is a faith-based belief system regarding the origins of the species. Global warming is a faith-based system regarding the ebb and flow of the climate. Macro-evolution and climate change are far less fact-based than a belief in Jesus.

    Evolution is not a religion.

    evolution is really simple and say’s that animals that are most adapt to survive to their environment will survive, pass on their genes, and over time the gene that is required to survive will become the most common gene.

    Climate change/Global warming is not faith based and is instead based off of data, data, and more data. Just look at global average surface temperature, surface ice levels, atmospheric CO2 levels, ocean levels, ocean acidification, etc

    • Simon

      Data needs to be interpreted.

      You interpret it one way based upon your metaphysical beliefs.

      We interpret it different based upon ours.

      Either way, we all end up relying on our beliefs.

      You choose to reject God because you want to rule yourself and be government by no one.

      Our witness is that God is faithful because we have encountered him and he has revealed himself to us, demonstrating his ongoing faithfulness.

      You choose fallible human interpretation with a strong bent towards Marxist Utopianism ie trust in the scientists and we will save the world from impending climate doom through big government that dominates our “carbon choices”.

      We choose the word of God which declares Jesus Messiah the only confident hope to deliver creation from sin and death, and from the curse on creation that is causing it’s decay, whether in human genetics or the climate systems of the earth.

      You believe the cause of climate problems are natural but we know that there is a spiritual root and that is the rejection of God by humanity.

      We’ve already seen the promised communist “Utopias” of Marixst types and it ended up with a whole lot of dissidents dead by the hands of corrupt men and a whole lot less “utopia” than was originally promised.

      Now, let’s wait for God to show his hand and we’ll see if he is as faithful to his promises about the end of the age as he has been to his myriad previous fulfilled promises.

      Consistency is a strong suit of God’s so I’m all in on “yes, God will keep all of his promises.”

      Choose wisely, friend.

  • James

    Just look at our DNA. It is a self-replicating information system that utilizes a code that is so incredibly complex that we are only just now starting to understand it a little bit. The amount of information that would be contained in just one pinhead of DNA would completely fill a stack of books that could stretch from our planet to the moon about 500 times.

    Just look at influenza. It is a nasty virus that utilises a code so incredibly complex that we are now only able to treat it’s symptoms with ineffective Tamiflu and Relenza.
    Therefore god made influenza to kill everyone

    • Simon

      You have just reinforced the initial point with another example – namely that DNA is an excessively complex program.

      All programs (especially complex ones) need a programmer. (Ie the initial point)

      And then you have gall to throw in more of your ingenious sarcasm as though somehow you’ve just refuted the initial point when you have done the exact opposite, exposing yourself to the ridicule of everyone here?

      Do you read before you post?

      What part of the bible’s simple narrative, namely that God made everything good but humanity’s choices to sin brought a curse that results in decay and death, is too hard to understand that you must resort to pummelling us all with your brilliant comedic quips?

      • “All programs (especially complex ones) need a programmer. (Ie the initial point)”

        DNA is as much a “program” as the chemical formula for water. It is a chemical, and it follows the rules of chemistry. It really is that simple – no programmer needed.

  • James

    If humans have been around for so long, where are all of the bones and all of the graves?

    Umm, they did decay.
    There are a bunch of artifacts from prehistoric humans, but are lacking in scope because they decay.

  • James

    In order to believe the theory of evolution, you must have enough blind faith to believe that life just popped into existence from non-life, and that such life just happened to have the ability to take in the nourishment it needed, to expel waste, and to reproduce itself, all the while having everything it needed to survive in the environment in which it suddenly found itself. Do you have that much blind faith?

    Evolution does not explain how the first life-forms appear but rather what life forms survive and which ones do not

    • Life is a chemical process. Simple chemical processes can evolve into complex ones. There is no hard line between life and non-life.

  • James

    Science is not a religion.
    Instant dry ink, electricity, cars, and advil did not pop out of nowhere.

  • James

    Scientists actually take credit for stopping the spread of diseases using vaccinations even though the invention of the flush toilet had more to do with that phenomenon than the pond slime scientists try to sell.

    Plumbing and resource extraction methods=thank you science.

    By the way, if you believe that toilets were responsible for the minimazitation of disease, why do the infection rates for diseases such as polio and whooping cough not all decline at the same time and rather when their vaccines came out

  • James

    Well science is peaceful and not peaceful.
    Science created antibotics, antifungals, antivirals but also created sarin gas, and machine guns.

    • JM

      It is a religion…just ask Jack Parsons which god he prayed to…

      • James

        You really should be denied medicine and electricity

  • James

    No, to believe in the theory of magic

    would have to believe that you could take a shoe box to the junk yard, randomly
    place various parts in it and shake it for a really, really long time – and
    eventually you would have a fully functioning, precise wrist watch that could
    accurately tell time. Or believe that at some point, over billions of
    years, a tornado would eventually pass over the same junk yard and you would
    get a fully functioning Boeing 747. Such notions are preposterous – but
    more likely to occur than for man to eventually “evolve” from a “big

  • James

    To believe in evolution, you believe that if you have a human that can survive without water and one that cant, in a drougt, the human that can survive without water will thrive and pass on it’s genes

  • James

    The public education system is very much religious which includes teaching the bible and not other religious texts.

    Christinanity dominates government despite the establishment clause in the consitution

  • James

    Anything that we dig up that is supposedly more than 250,000 years old should have absolutely no detectable radiocarbon in it whatsoever. But instead, we find it in everything that we dig up – even dinosaur bones. This is clear evidence that the “millions of years” theory is simply a bunch of nonsense…

    Carbon 14 goes something like this.

    If you have 1 million carbon 14 atoms.
    The first 500,000 will become nitrogen-15 in 5730 years.
    The next 250,000 will become nitrogen-15 in the next 5730.

    If anyone has tried to put in y=-0.5x^2, it almost never reaches zero

    • iris


    • You do realize that carbon dating is not the only form of radiometric dating, right? They *don’t* use it for anything over a few tens of thousands of years old.

  • James

    The odds of even a single sell “assembling itself” by chance are so low that they aren’t even worth talking about. The following is an excerpt from Jonathan Gray’s book entitled “The Forbidden Secret“…


    Yes, that is why the first life forms took millions of years to create.

  • pokerchip

    It’s a “free” country. Everyone HAD a right to their own opinion.

  • Mart1963

    If Evolution was correct then mankind could bring Hawkins to full functionality because what nature can do by flukes, man should have no problems doing it by design but it seems nature is much more complex therefore had to had been designed as Hawkins is still sitting in a wheel chair and is constantly de-evolving.

    The natural order of things is to go from a higher form to a lower form and therefore the natural order of things goes against life itself, life is unnatural but it happens therefore it has to have been designed by a Creator!

    • iris

      excellent observation!

    • JosieA

      Right on! Isn’t this why God sent a saviour into the world, so that whosoever believes in him shall not perish, but…….?

      • iris

        Yes! Thanks! There are no odds with Him, in Him is only yes, in fact. 2nd Cor 1:19,20.

    • That may be the dumbest thing I’ve ever read. Thank you for demonstrating that you dropped out of elementary school!

    • Corvus2

      Spelling his name wrong speaks volumes, his name is Stephen Hawking. The rest of what you say is totally nonsensical…

  • Sandbagger

    …”(Some think God is a magician…)…able to do everything. But that is not so.” (the Pope)

    Wow. Just. Wow.

    Yes, he said God is not able to do everything.

    Makes one wonder what god the Pope is talking about, because it can’t be the God of the Bible. You know, the one God described as all-powerful.

    Since when did “all” not mean everything? Never.

    The Pope is a blasphemer, and does NOT speak for true Christians who believe in the God of the Bible.

    • Sandbagger

      Thanks for the list of 44 reasons, Michael. It will come in handy for going over with our young son.

  • Josephine Dorion

    well,…..ok. I do believe that there is an intelligence /power that created all these… my definition, i call it SUPER-CONSCIOUS MIND. The lifeforce, the essence, energy (AKA Spirit) that is the animating principle of everything physical and non-physical.

    The term God, that white haired, white bearded entity sitting up on a cloud,called “God the Father” that is surrounded by angels, is NOT this SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND- Creator. This white haired God is strictly a creation of other created beings with an ulterior motive to control and use us.

    I’m mentally well versed that this SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND is the SOURCE of all things; When a shaman calls on the healing power of herbs, it is the SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND that answers. We call this aspect :SOURCE. Source of healing, source of power,source of intelligence.

    Everything is inside it (including the game called Good Vs. Evil)……and that we ensouled humans are inexorably connected or at one with it. We call this aspect of this SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND…. Everywhere present

    This SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND is inside of us (it is who we are) and also outside of us (it is what it is)…………and we can commune with this Creator Mind , as if it were us.. We call this aspect of SUPERCONSCIOUS MIND …All-that-Is.

    There is much I don’t understand about this Creator Mind, because I suspect,… we have been mis-lead by others; or our physical brain do not have the capacity to understand THIS PARTICULAR program (like a computer program) ; or that we are not given this program.

    So frustrating.

  • Pascal van der Heijden

    The name Jesus was carefully chosen by wise men which came from the East and who had desided to guide us, by brainwashing, to the bitter end for the enternity of the cosmos.
    Jesus also means ”Je suis” or ”I am” and his last name Christ means Crucified so his name means ”I am Crucified”. What Jesus showed us in his name is that we (the humans) would destroy ourselves. The story of his life was the prediction of what would happen for the cosmos or God because the cosmos rules us in everything and this ruling is nothing more then that everything can’t go any other way because it’s the perfection.
    We had to grow to a human plaque on earth because the earth needs the energy we make in the cosmic cycle. The weakening of the earth will finally let us react with an all destroying nucleair war. This way the cosmic clock will be ticking in perfection for the next cosmic cylce… into infinity.
    We just all read it the wrong way and/but we were meant to read this way.
    It was all old ancient wisdom and the mercy we get when we die is that all our emotions (which they told in comparisons as sins) are cleaned. This emotions lay in the genes and are the reason why we think we need mercy in the first place.

    • Pascal, you’re insane.

      • Pascal van der Heijden

        Thanks… that’s really a compliment in this grazy world.

  • Dennis Mirto

    Simply stated, Hawkings understands that multiple dimensions exist, yet he has no place for sin, no place for heaven, or no place for Hell?…..He can explain all the known forces and laws yet he cannot produce anything that dictates creation. The creation force he has left to Darwin. Yet to this day, after all the science, all the talk from scholars, researchers, and all the other disciplines, the creation force of “Evolution” has not proved one single fact behind the science…….Yet there has been overwhelming proof that “God” exists. Not the Judaic God, nor the Muslim God, and certainly not the God of 40,000+ Christian sects here in America, or the “God of all the rest……..The God that exists has given many gifts, many miracles, many signs and wonders, so much so that it is undeniable…….The Triune God of the Roman Catholic Church is the God of the Universe….one example of proof found within the Church that proves beyond a doubt that it is God’s Holy Church – The Virgin of Guadalupe hanging in the Cathedral in Mexico City. Many have said it is man-made, and not a miracle……Look it up. Many, many scholars have examined it, and NONE to this day can declare it a forgery. Why?……Because THEY CAN’T… me something else on earth that exists that has been viewed as many times as the Virgin of Guadalupe, and had those results…….Hawkins needs to feel the love of God – that’s the only thing that will set him free of that wheelchair…….He probably hates his disease so much that he is blaming God for his suffering.

    • LOL! Oh, Dennis. You really are out of your league here. Look up the article “The Virgin of Guadalupe” on the Skeptoid website. It’s very well explained. There is literally nothing miraculous here.

  • Without doing much research, numbers 1 and 2 are false. Billions of fossils have already been found. Just one natural history museum will usually have millions in their collections.

  • Arizona

    OH america,america,HOW could you listen to a braindead moron in a wheel chair who claims to be a scientist,ANYONE who thinks a T-REX crawled out of a mudpuddle is an IDIOT,sadly everyone in america is lost,you see the proof before your eyes and STILL you believe these morons who are obviously lieing to you…..GET CLOSE TO OUR LORD YAHUSHUA,hes coming soon,DON’T miss out thinking you have all the time in the world,YOU DON’T………

  • Spook89

    The “Evolution ministers” bloviate that we descended from the apes. So, why do we still have apes? And consider, if you will, the evergreen tree. It bears its own seed, in order to reproduce. Supposedly, it evolved. So, what did the tree do in the interim until the tree “evolved” to develop its own seeds?

  • Brian Miller

    LOL, is this guy serious? Evolution only deals with organisms adapting to their environment. It says NOTHING about the origins of life. Abiogenesis deals with the origins of life. It seems that he (and many of the users here) failed basic biology in school by using outdated and already debunked arguments.

    • JayCee087

      Wouldn’t “organisms adapting to their environment” be simply called “adaptation”? When did evolution become “adaptation”? lol are YOU serious? Evolutionary Theories of life have now, and thousands of years ago, conjured up stories about origins of life and that is something I learned in a “lowest ranked first-world” public school. Evolution is just another religion, like all religions thinking their idea on origins of all things are true.

      • Brian Miller

        > Wouldn’t “organisms adapting to their environment” be simply called “adaptation”?When did evolution become “adaptation”?”

        Evolution incorporates adaption as well as variation. Adaptation + Variation = Evolution.

        “Evolutionary Theories of life have now, and thousands of years ago,
        conjured up stories about origins of life .”

        Again, evolution does NOT deal with the origins of life, that’s abiogenesis. I don’t know if you’re willingly being ignorant here.

        “Evolution is just another religion, like all religions thinking their idea on origins of all things are true.”

        Religion is defined by:

        “An organized collection of beliefs, cultural systems, and world views that relate humanity to an order of existence.”

        While evolution is defined by:

        “The change in the heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations.”

        The two are NOWHERE NEAR related.

        • I don’t know if you are being deliberately ignorant or what, but Charles Darwin’s book that popularly began this debate is titled, Origin of Species by means of natural selection. Key word: Origin of Species. He theorizes in his work that by natural selection and adaption, variations in new species will over time lead to new species. His theory led to ONE conclusion, the theory of abiogenesis, that life must have originated from a single species or from non-living matter. Darwin writes: “Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed.” That belief takes a lot of faith, as much faith as a me as a Christian believing that life was first breathed into Adam and not a single being, from which all diverse forms of life then branched off from. Both take faith, which is the point of this article, since no one has observed the transmutation of species first hand, you still rely on faith and belief to believe it is true.

          • You’re a dope.

          • Corvus2

            Origin of Species, not Origin of Life… (eye roll)

  • Holger Jahndel


    Against postmodern left-liberal Establishment and against the City of London with Mario Draghi and Goldmann-Sachs and so on

    The truth about Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton

    The LaRouche Movement EIE NEWS, also see the international “Forum for a New Paradigm” by the SCHILLER Institute!

    American Free Press, with Pat Buchanan, a real conservative and patriot, no Neocon and no Neoliberal Globalist and no postmodern “Chicago Boy” with Milton Friedman and his Monetarism of Any Rands so called philosophy of “Objectivism” and Alfred Kinseys faked and fraud Kinsey studies! Also about Christianity and Churches! Against NWO or New World Order and Neoliberalism!

    Peak Oil and 9.11. Daily Peak Oil Blog by Michael C. Ruppert (R.I.P.), also watch the video documentation “Collapse” with Michael C. Ruppert and read Heinbergs books about Peak Oil and “Peak Everything” and ressources running short!

  • Thunderbolt

    Well, Hawking has the freedom that God gave him to go down that path of belief if he so desires, but for me, I will trust God and His Word over man’ “science” anyday.

  • Jaymes Carson

    I can’t imagine being trapped in a body such as Hawking’s, not being mean but, he’s really an upright corpse, he’s just still breathing. But to be trapped in such a condition, he’s obviously so full of himself, pride, convinced in his own mind, he’s got it all figured out, yet, he can’t save himself, he can barely do anything, but confessing with his own mouth, there is no God? Really? I think he’s so angry inside, that in his position, sadly the world has propped him up to be this brilliant human, but I find him far darker, not so human after, for in his pride and entrapment, he is projecting, to all of us, to the world, his ideals, his so called genius, fooling many to believe like him, there is no God, that like being trapped in his own body, he’s helping satan trap us in this world, for with out GOD, we can never leave it. There is no Savior, no hope, just existing in a trapped state of being, how terribly sad and hopeless. I feel sorry for him, he is so out of touch and out of his mind really, satan has him and sadly using Hawkings to influence the world with his so called brilliance, and sadly many are going to follow, to their demise of listening to this foolish, entrapped man. If he’d use a fraction of his true mental capabilities, and even just a little heart, learn of Jesus, he could move mountains, just with his tongue, just by uttering the Truth…the Truth of GOD.

  • felicityva

    This man is not brilliant. He’s a fool.

  • Spectrum

    Science is the tool God uses to demonstrate the glory of His Creation.

  • Literally everything is a transitional form.

  • “Scientists actually take credit for stopping the spread of diseases using vaccinations even though the invention of the flush toilet had more to do with that phenomenon than the pond slime scientists try to sell.”

    Which is why we don’t see disease anywhere in the developed world anymore, right? …

  • Newton died almost 400 years ago. We have learned a bit since then, and you might want to catch up.

  • That’s hilarious. Barely anyone on that list is actually in a relevant field.

    Look up Project Steve sometime – it’s a much larger list just of scientists *in relevant fields*, and *NAMED STEVE*.

    Evolution deniers are a vanishingly small minority.