Neil deGrasse Tyson Lays Smackdown On God [Pic]

Submitted by: 3MM@ 5 years ago in Science

Harsh!
There are 60 comments:
Male 2,516
@CrakrJak: The difference is that, unlike creeds, we are open to admit that these 11 dimensions are just theoretical, until proven otherwise.

For the record, about 20% of physicists believe in String "theory", which is not really a theory as it has no proof. But "string hypothesis" doesn`t have the same ring does it?

The other 80% simply admit we don`t know. Heck, I even doubt the place where string theory comes from: Quantum Field Theory.
0
Reply
Female 735
@lawndartsftw

...you use too many ellipses...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Yet according to the most recent `string theory` there at least 11 dimensions, most of which we can`t perceive, and possibly an endless number of universes on top of that.

There is plenty of room for God to exist, in fact there is more room for him to exist, than we exist in.
0
Reply
Female 2
Ah, the wonderful Dr. Tyson. I wish I was half as smart as this man. Truly an example that people should strive to emulate.

Long may reason and science rule!
0
Reply
Male 1,810
...without context, this is just trolling....
0
Reply
Male 3,745
"Right now, I might or might not be holding a coin in my hand.

Do you believe that I am?

If you don`t (and why would you?) does that mean that you *must* believe that I am not? "

now what if you were holding a coin in your hand at the time you wrote this just to drat with us?
0
Reply
Male 694
@Angilion, nicely put you stupid asshat
(didnt feel right giving a compliment on IAB, what with all the hate spweing in the comments of EVERY post... but yes, i agree with what you said, 100%)
[also, no Otto67, thats not "irony"...]
0
Reply
Male 453
If you think about it....

Context or no context, the quote has the same meaning.

I am = Atheist
0
Reply
Male 3,060
Meh, go back to making your Canadian teen drama.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Atheists deny the existence of God.[/quote]

No, they don`t. Theists claim atheists deny the existence of whatever god or gods the theist speaking at the time believes in. That`s not the same thing.

Atheists don`t believe in any gods. Not just whatever one you meant by "God" (presumably the Abrahamic one).

Not believing in gods is not the same as believing in not-gods.

Right now, I might or might not be holding a coin in my hand.

Do you believe that I am?

If you don`t (and why would you?) does that mean that you *must* believe that I am not?

I say that it doesn`t. You don`t have to believe either. You can simply not believe. You can choose rationality instead of believe - you can simply say "One or the other must be true but I don`t know which".

Before anyone says "that`s agnosticism" - agnosticism is not a third position with respect to religion. It`s a different thing
0
Reply
Male 736
What is perhaps most pleasing to me are the number of people on here who know the real quote, and stood up for context in the face of incitement.
0
Reply
Male 79
This quote is out of context. I believe he prefaces this statement with, and I`m paraphrasing: "If you believe God is the mysteries in the universe that science can`t yet explain. Then..."
0
Reply
Male 438
"Science is a never ending source of arrogance and douchebaggery. -Me"

The number of different sciences and scientists which allowed you to convey this statement over the internet makes it the definition of `irony`.
0
Reply
Male 4,793
BOOM owned! Because Fu*k yo religion.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
"If that`s how you want to invoke your evidence for god, then god is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance."

The Actual NDGT quote.

If X, then Y.

Not just Y.

Where X is "we only understand 4% of this stuff [...] the rest must be God".

That`s why it`s a misquote. Now let go of Mr Tyson`s coat-tails please, you`re getting ignorance all over the back of him.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
buscompany, DrProfessor made my point. :-)
0
Reply
Male 3,894
Look, at some point, we`re going to have the vast majority of the physical world pretty much figured out. We`re going to know how and why most things happen. We`re going to find that nothing in the history of mankind has been particularly anomalous or, to use a more loaded word, "miraculous".

The only way God can exist is if he lives in a purely spiritual realm with no tangible effect on the physical, and acts as a "shepherd of souls" to take care of your spiritual aspect once you`ve died.
0
Reply
Male 735
that`s kind of an ignorant thing to say
0
Reply
Male 106
@jendrian
The change in belief is that I was converting patchgrabber (in my hypothetical example) from the belief that British Imperial units were more efficient to the belief that SI is more efficient.

If you believe the existence of god is falsifiable in principle, than yes, I suppose any god would be a god of gaps. But given that God is thought to exist outside the physical universe (or multiverse), it seems dubious that we will ever be able to know for certain whether or not God exists. All we have to go on in our investigations is evidence that exists within this universe.
0
Reply
Male 5,413
@EgalM
That`s like saying
"How they dare they further human development out of dark age fairy tales into a progress species eager to learn"
0
Reply
Male 2,516
that`s a great point notorious98 is making, and I wholeheartedly agree with it. The greatest minds in the world have, at some point of their lives or throughout their entire lives, been somehow religious.

And people who are lazy about learning science, are going to be lazy regardless of religion.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
Oh you mean the same stuff that brought the technology you`re using to type that so that everybody in the world can see it, produces arrogance and douchebaggery?

More so than convincing millions of people, without any proof whatsoever, that there`s an invisible guy watching every little thing you do, who will send you to eternal torment for the littlest things, and in whose name some of the most heinous crimes in human history have been committed without due punishment?

Yeah I`m sure scientists are a bunch of non-nice individuals out to get you, you arrogant douchebag
0
Reply
Male 151
@Buiadh

Even without religion we will never have a world filled with free thinkers. Besides, religion is not the antithesis of free thought. It`s an assumption pushed forth by others, such as yourself, that continue that false belief. I`m a Christian, but I question those beliefs all the time. Does that mean I`m not a free thinker? I question how valid the Bible is regularly. But the fact that I believe doesn`t mean I am devoid of individual thought. It`s my choice to believe there is something more powerful than myself out there. It`s my choice to believe that so many unexplainable phenomena (matter creation in a void) has something to do with a more powerful entity. Hell, I`ve also pushed around the thought that perhaps we`re just a science experiment in a world larger than our own (Tree House of Horror episode for reference). In conclusion, there will always be sheep, with or without religion.
0
Reply
Male 1,735
Science is a never ending source of arrogance and douchebaggery. -Me
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@buscompany: I see, but Imperial to SI does involve a change of mind into a different system that is, from one belief (say christian) to another (say, catholic). So I`m still not sure what your point is; there`s only perhaps a mistake for someone who doesn`t believe the existence of god is something we can answer, which I for one, believe it is within reach.

Atheists don`t seem all that hung up on trying to convert people, as much as showing everybody that smokes and mirrors are not supernatural. Granted, "militant" atheism does go to extremes to show this point but I dare you show them wrong; even the face of militant atheism, Dawkins, agrees on the limits of science and stays within.

The second point was meant for those talking below you, FoolsPrussia, patchgrabber, patchouly and those who were talking about a similar point.
0
Reply
Male 546
I believe in Science....
another anti- topic
0
Reply
Male 106
@jendrian
I`m sorry, I meant convert from British Imperial units to SI, I mispoke. I think you understood my point, though, so I`m not sure it mattered. As for your second point, I`m not sure what you`re talking about. I never said anything about what an atheist what do if presented with proof of god`s existence, it seems like you`re just trying to create a strawman to argue against.

The reason it was a misquote is because Tyson was talking specifically about a "god of gaps" (at least, according to ORGNCHEMST he was, I have not seen the video myself). A god of gaps occurs when people try to use lack of scientific knowledge as evidence for the existence of a god. It`s only applicable to people who make teleological arguments for the existence of god. It is not an applicable term for just any belief in god, because the question of whether or not god exists is not a scientific question.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
I don`t understand how this is a misquote; I didn`t see or hear it in the original context (because I don`t really care about Tyson) but from ORGNCHEMST explained he was talking about how some people`s definition changes over time as the god of the gaps recedes.

How`s that a misquote? It`s only a misquote if you don`t accept that every religious person has their own personal view of what "god" is.

@buscompany: the metric system is the SI, you`re saying that conversion from vegan to "vegetarian who doesn`t eat any animal products" has some merit, somehow, even though no act of conversion ever took place.

Besides, show me an atheist that would deny god`s existence if there was any proof of it. That means that all atheists hold a piece in their minds where, provided good evidence, would change their minds. The fact that no one is 100% atheist doesn`t make agnosticism, the word pretty much means we don`t care.
0
Reply
Male 833
@thatjimguy & jadoig

if he had said religion he would have been wrong
god is the explanation for the unexplainable
thus as science expands and can explain more and more god is an explanation for less and less.
religion is just rules for daily behavior and worship of said god and offers no explanations for anything other than `god did it`
0
Reply
Male 2,034
I still think it`s ignorant to assume that science and religion are mutually exclusive beliefs.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@buscompany: It`s useful to clarify, because using that word in an argument containing religion implies that you are using the word with the religious connotation, a form of equivocation fallacy.
0
Reply
Male 434
Thatjimguy: "If he said religion, I`d have not much quarrel with him on this one."

That`s what I came in here to say
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I think that "zealous" is a better term to describe some atheists. The term "zealot" has morphed into something that exists beyond the original religious definition. Any growing movement tends to take on the extremists who are intolerant of others. As a vegan, I see the same problem within that particular movement. It`s frustrating when you`ve defined yourself a certain way based on a rational view of the issues, and you have the zealous people who are intolerant of other perspectives. The zealots can often define the movement, if viewed from an outside perspective.
0
Reply
Male 106
@patchgrabber

There is nothing inherent in the definition of convert that requires it to be between religions. If I were to convince you that the metric system is more efficient than SI, I would have converted you from one belief to another. That`s all I mean when I say there are atheists who make a point out of trying to convert non-religious people into an atheistic belief system.
0
Reply
Male 106
@patchouly

Again you`ve missed the point. There are religious people who like to cram their beliefs down people`s throat, I agree. That`s why when atheists say stuff and post stuff with the intention of cramming their beliefs down other people`s throats, such as this poorly misquoted macro, atheism gets accused of being like a religion.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@buscompany: You say atheists "try to convert," but that is a loaded statement, because conversion implies atheism is a religion to begin with. If someone worships Zeus and believes lightning is made from Zeus throwing it from up above, would you say that people who demonstrate how lightning is actually formed and then tell the Zeus worshipers are trying to "convert" them?
0
Reply
Male 3,445
I do think this image actually raises an interesting point that ties into this whole "is Atheism a religion" discussion. Atheists (whom I generally ally myself with in a lot of ways) need to be careful as their community grows. Taking a quote so out of context like this is antithetical to the espoused code of most atheists. It`s actually quite ironic that this quote is being used to promote an atheist viewpoint, when the context actually doesn`t support that, since atheists tend to value an evidence-based worldview.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
@ buscompany:

When religious folks stop cramming religion down my throat 20 times a day, I`ll stop telling them how ridiculous they are.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@patch: I respect that view.
0
Reply
Male 106
@patchouly

And you don`t understand what people mean when they say atheism has become a religion. They`re not insisting that atheism is a faith-based set of beliefs; they mean that it is taught and preached by many people with the intention to convert others. Perhaps a better way to put it is to say that atheism has become evangelical.

There are many atheists who base their disbelief in a god on rational thought, and most of them are content to let others believe what they want because they understand that if there is no god it simply does not matter. There are just as many others, unfortunately, that see it as their duty to change everyone else`s mind.

FoolsPrussia has it right, the only time an atheist or agnostic should "fight" against religion is when a religion is trying to make a scientific statement, such as is the case with evolution and global warming.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@FoolsPrussia: I understand your point, but that`s why I also am an agnostic atheist. I don`t know for sure, but until I find reasonable proof otherwise my stance is that of skepticism. The data don`t fit the claims.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
elderban:
Even Athiests need something to cling on to, so that`s why you see images like this...
...I believe Atheism is as much of a religious movement as any other religion, even though it is against religion.
-------

Then you don`t understand what Atheism is. I don`t believe in any Gods or Religions. I believe in facts. Believing in facts is no more a religion then believing in gravity is.

Religion is a faith based belief system, put in place to help humans understand the world around them, before science came around. Now that we have science to explain things, we no longer need religion.

Abandoning the Voodoo of religion, is not a religion.
0
Reply
Male 390
Even Athiests need something to cling on to, so that`s why you see images like this, and that`s why people will say that Tyson is an Athiest even though he himself said he`s not.

Like Tyson, I am agnostic to. But, also like Tyson, I believe Atheism is as much of a religious movement as any other religion, even though it is against religion.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
@patch: I have mixed feelings on Tyson. He`s got a great personality, and he`s obviously knowledgeable, but he`s sort of become a caricature of the TV scientist in some ways.

However, I share his reluctance to be labeled an "atheist." In a lot of ways, my views make me closer to atheist than anything else, but I find the term limiting. Atheists deny the existence of God. I deny the dogmatic God that religions like to portray, but my personal feeling is that there is wisdom in admitting that I am just not capable of knowing either way for sure. Or for example, imagine that our reality is just a simulation in someone`s computer. Would that not mean there is a "God" of sorts who coded our reality? There are too many possibilities for me to confirm or deny.

I still work to fight against religious denial of science, but I also believe that people have every right to follow whatever belief system they want as long as it doesn`t harm anyone else.
0
Reply
Male 72
this is why people should stop posting someone`s picture with a quote on it. 99% of the time, it`s a misquote or a quote out of context. Stop posting misquoted texts on pictures and start posting videos of them saying things.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
@FoolsPrussia: That was an interesting vid. I find it funny he says he doesn`t have the energy to go debating the issue and whatnot, but he`s on youtube or tv every week. He`s an agnostic atheist, but he`s speaking of the label of `atheist` as a thing separate from atheism itself. Saying "I`m agnostic" is only a partial answer.
0
Reply
Female 836
BAM!
0
Reply
Male 36
This is a horrible misquote. In this talk he was pointing out how some people adhere to a "god of the gaps" view of what god is. So somebody doesn`t understand how the tides work and they say "that`s god." The point Tyson was making is that if this "god of the gaps" is how you like to think of your god then, "your god is an ever-receding pocket of ignorance."
0
Reply
Male 6,737
I hope that, in the future, we an have a world without religion and filled with free thinkers.
0
Reply
Male 3,445
You know, Tyson doesn`t consider himself an atheist:

Tyson: Atheist or Angnostic?
0
Reply
Female 2,602
Meh, he`s no Oolon Colluphid.
0
Reply
Female 3,726
Fairytales, they come true...
0
Reply
Male 15,329
Yup, about sums it up... that is until you realise it is so, then you just call it ignorance.
0
Reply
Male 5,193
This makes sense if you don`t just pick 9 words from his talk.
0
Reply
Male 1,754
Neil is just doing his thang! Love this guys quotes.
0
Reply
Male 259
Meh. His view of "God" is that "God" only exists in the unexplained. Of course "God" recedes with scientific advance. Old argument.
0
Reply
Male 5,811
Um, if this were something we haven`t seen a hundred times on IAB I might be impressed.
0
Reply
Male 98
Smart man.
0
Reply
Male 474
If he said religion, I`d have not much quarrel with him on this one.
0
Reply
Female 256
0
Reply