Former Atheist Anthony Hopkins Defies Hollywood, Reveals What Led Him To God... (1 Viewer)

[code1211]

And, having seen the effects, we can predict what will happen in the future ,with other galaxies, stars , etc etc etc. While there are a number of different models of what Dark Energy could be, so far, the model that is consistent with being able to predicts the effects when a new situation is examined is it being very small particles. The modification of how gravity works has been ruled out, because of observations. The need to come up with the concept was due to observations, and the continued observations show that the behavior examined is consistent of small particles whose only interactions are via gravity.

Please link to the discovery of the actual "small particles" that you seem to think exist.

If you have faith, you don't need proof. If you have proof, you don't need faith.

You don't seem to have proof. On what do you base your belief?

 

[code1211]

[Dark matter]



NO!!!!

We know that it is but don't know what it is.

Simple for any who are not being deliberately ignorant.

Ah-ha! So then, it is EXACTLY like God or any of the gods.

An effect does not prove what the cause might be. It proves only that the effect is observable.

In the case of spiritual faith, many effects are explained by a cause which many call God. This is fine in the case of faith-based belief systems. In the case of science, faith is not as highly regarded.

 

[code1211]

What the hell sort of evaision of the bleeding obvious are you at anow?

Simply comparing the direct physical proof of power tools to the direct physical proof of Dark Matter.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Ah-ha! So then, it is EXACTLY like God or any of the gods.

An effect does not prove what the cause might be. It proves only that the effect is observable.

In the case of spiritual faith, many effects are explained by a cause which many call God. This is fine in the case of faith-based belief systems. In the case of science, faith is not as highly regarded.

NO!!!!!

It is nothing like any god because we see the effect!!!!

If you can point to the effect of something, say the wind, then you can reasonably infer its' existance. You can't see the wind directly but you know it is there due to the effect that movement of air has upon other things.

 

[zyzygy]

NO!!!!!

It is nothing like any god because we see the effect!!!!

If you can point to the effect of something, say the wind, then you can reasonably infer its' existance. You can't see the wind directly but you know it is there due to the effect that movement of air has upon other things.

Something is affecting the beghaviour of galaxies and it's not a god.

 

[Manc Skipper]

In what form does the "defiance of Hollywood" express itself? Dance? Song? Poetry? The Welshlove two out of three

 

[Tim the plumber]

Ah-ha! So then, it is EXACTLY like God or any of the gods.

An effect does not prove what the cause might be. It proves only that the effect is observable.

In the case of spiritual faith, many effects are explained by a cause which many call God. This is fine in the case of faith-based belief systems. In the case of science, faith is not as highly regarded.

An effect shows that there is a cause, generally.

If there is no effect then you have to ask why the hell are you saying there is a cause?

If you have any effect that can only be explained by your god then tell us what the hell it is.

 

[code1211]

NO!!!!!

It is nothing like any god because we see the effect!!!!

If you can point to the effect of something, say the wind, then you can reasonably infer its' existance. You can't see the wind directly but you know it is there due to the effect that movement of air has upon other things.

Our science developed reasonable explanations of gravity that explained the orbit of planets and those orbits contributed to many things including the occurrences of Ice Ages and Interglacials.

I assume in some way that the occurrences of Ice Ages and Interglacials in some way had and has an impact on the flow of air which in some cases results in wind.

Further, I assume that the stuff called "Dark Matter" is present in our solar system and probably even in our atmosphere in some amount.

However, the effect was entirely unnoticed locally. The presence was entirely undetected locally. The connections were completely ignored locally.

Causes don't need to be large to contribute to significant effects. Things can be present and not be noticed and yet impact everything all the time.

Our inability to notice something not apparent to us does not mean that the thing is not there. It only means we don't notice it. You know, like Dark Matter.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Our science developed reasonable explanations of gravity that explained the orbit of planets and those orbits contributed to many things including the occurrences of Ice Ages and Interglacials.

I assume in some way that the occurrences of Ice Ages and Interglacials in some way had and has an impact on the flow of air which in some cases results in wind.

Further, I assume that the stuff called "Dark Matter" is present in our solar system and probably even in our atmosphere in some amount.

However, the effect was entirely unnoticed locally. The presence was entirely undetected locally. The connections were completely ignored locally.

Causes don't need to be large to contribute to significant effects. Things can be present and not be noticed and yet impact everything all the time.

Our inability to notice something not apparent to us does not mean that the thing is not there. It only means we don't notice it. You know, like Dark Matter.

That does not excuse making up drivel.

If you have no reason to believe is x then it does not exist. You may find reason, evidence, to believe in it later but untill you have some sort of positive reason for believing in it it is simply drivel to spout on about it.

For example;

If I was to go back in time to the classical Roman period and explain to Ceasar about radio waves and radar I would be talking utter drivel as I would be utterly unable to substanciate my claims.

Dark matter is something I can show you evidence for. You will avoid looking at it as it would mean doing some reality stuff you don't like.

I can show you clear evidence that shows the expansion and progress of the universe since 12.5 billion years ago. i don't talk about the 1.2 billion years or so before that as I can't show you the evidence because t is too technical for me.

 

[code1211]

An effect shows that there is a cause, generally.

If there is no effect then you have to ask why the hell are you saying there is a cause?

If you have any effect that can only be explained by your god then tell us what the hell it is.

Hell.

 

[Logician Man]

At some point in history, there were no power tools, no power to power them, no tools at all prior to that and no people before that.

At some point, some person thought it might be a good idea to use a stick or a stone to accomplish something and from there the refining of the idea(s) started and eventually led to power tools.

Quite literally, power tolls DID come into the world by magical thinking.

'Abstract thinking' does NOT equal 'magical thinking'.

 

[code1211]

That does not excuse making up drivel.

If you have no reason to believe is x then it does not exist. You may find reason, evidence, to believe in it later but untill you have some sort of positive reason for believing in it it is simply drivel to spout on about it.

For example;

If I was to go back in time to the classical Roman period and explain to Ceasar about radio waves and radar I would be talking utter drivel as I would be utterly unable to substanciate my claims.

Dark matter is something I can show you evidence for. You will avoid looking at it as it would mean doing some reality stuff you don't like.

I can show you clear evidence that shows the expansion and progress of the universe since 12.5 billion years ago. i don't talk about the 1.2 billion years or so before that as I can't show you the evidence because t is too technical for me.

You are making a leap of faith.

You can show me effects of something that you cannot produce or define.

You can observe effects, but have no idea what causes the effects. You do know that the effects seem to occur, but also know with equal certainty that the cause is not observable.

The tangible cause exists today only in mathematical equations. The effect exists in the real universe.

 

[Tim the plumber]

You are making a leap of faith.

You can show me effects of something that you cannot produce or define.

You can observe effects, but have no idea what causes the effects. You do know that the effects seem to occur, but also know with equal certainty that the cause is not observable.

The tangible cause exists today only in mathematical equations. The effect exists in the real universe.

Which is why we say that we do not know what is causing the observed effect and the lable dark matter is just a place holder untill humanity has worked out what is happening.

You seem to think that any situation where there is any uncertainty equals faith. You are wrong.

 

[code1211]

'Abstract thinking' does NOT equal 'magical thinking'.

Being open to the possibility of something not observable seems to me to be the defining characteristic of both.

What is the difference between these two for you?

 

[code1211]

Which is why we say that we do not know what is causing the observed effect and the lable dark matter is just a place holder untill humanity has worked out what is happening.

You seem to think that any situation where there is any uncertainty equals faith. You are wrong.

Firm belief in a thing whose existence is uncertain seems to require, on some level, faith.

 

[Tim the plumber]

Firm belief in a thing whose existence is uncertain seems to require, on some level, faith.

WHICH IS WHY THERE IS NO FIRM BELIEF!!!!

How many ways do we have to say it?

 

[pinqy]

From your post:

"Quote Originally Posted by pinqy View Post
I’m sorry, how is that different from the aether theory? It was an assumed substance that explained the behavior of light. It was the accepted belief for centuries. Your explanation of dark matter would apply about the same to aether.


What is the alternative? And as long as the definition we use works, then it works and therefore seems to be true. If our knowledge changes, the the definition will also change.

We don’t know that. Maybe there is no such thing as dark matter and it’s just that our understanding of gravity is wrong. But if it does exist, than we can say quite a bit about its properties; things that would have to be true for it to have the effects it does.


Well, either our understanding of gravity is completely off (which it might be) or there is something causing the effects we OBSERVE. And it can be defined by the characteristics we observe.

If it were believed by faith, then no observations or consistency in observations would be required. Dark matter is only tentatively accepted and will be abandoned if/when we get better information. No faith required."

I asked what you considered I had said that was not factual. None of those quotations contain anything that is not factual or is based only on belief.

You observe only the effect, not the thing. Yet you believe the thing exists

No, I do not. I have no idea if there is any such thing as dark matter. I don’t have a belief one way or the other. “Dark Matter” is a place holder term.

The movement of galaxies contradicts our understanding of physics.
So it could be our understanding of gravity is wrong. It probably is wrong, we just don’t know which parts.
But if our understanding is correct, then there is something, we don’t Know exactly what, that is causing the behaviors.
IF there is something we cam’t Observe, then it must have certain properties.
We can make predictions about future observations.
Note, that none of this is claiming that dark matter actually exists.

and you also accept definitions and quantifications of this thing and even that this thing is matter.

IF it exists it would be matter and have certain properties.

That is faith.

You observe ONLY the effects. EVERYTHING else is faith.

No. It is speculation. It is a hypothesis. It is entirely based on specific effects and predictable behavior.

Faith does not require evidence. Many effects have been attributed to gods but some other explanation has been found.

F

 

[Logician Man]

Being open to the possibility of something not observable seems to me to be the defining characteristic of both.

What is the difference between these two for you?

magical implies something supernatural . Abstract is nature's way of allowing the mind to use concepts and to make and understand generalizations. ( nothing magical implied )

 

[RAMOSS]

Hell.

What the heck is hell?

 

[TheParser]

In the liberal, secular world of Hollywood, it’s rare to find any actor who is brave enough to be open about their faith in God. Hollywood tends to promote atheism as “cool” and Christianity as boringly conservative or even offensive. That’s why it was so refreshing to see legendary actor Sir Anthony Hopkins open up about his strong faith in God.

Faithwire reported that while appearing at the 11th annual LEAP Conference last week, Hopkins, 80, talked about how he went from being an outspoken atheist to believing in a higher power. Though he does not identify as a Christian, Hopkins did say that he strongly believes God exists.

During the appearance, Hopkins recounted the turning point in his life that came in 1975 as he sat in an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting where a woman asked him a deep question that changed his entire life.

“Why don’t you just trust in God?” the woman asked him. Hopkins explained from that moment onward, he no longer had any desire to consume alcohol.

Hopkins told the students at the conference that he thinks people “are capable of so much” and that he “cannot believe that my life is what it is because I should have died in Wales, drunk or something like that.” He can’t help but give credit to God for turning his life around during that powerful moment in 1975.

This isn’t the first time Hopkins has opened up about his beliefs in a higher power. While promoting his biblical movie Noah back in 2014, Hopkins said that his faith has gotten stronger as he ages.

“I feel every day, as I get older, anyway, that it’s all a miracle,” he explained. “I mean, my heart beats, my lungs breath. That is an extraordinary — an extraordinary phenomenon.”

https://www.tmn.today/2018/08/anthony-hopkins-faith-story/

I envy people who have convinced themselves that a caring God exists.

So my hat off to Sir Anthony.

Personally, the unspeakable suffering of human beings (not to mention four-legged animals, too) throughout history up to this very moment is proof positive that the idea of a God is absurd.

But I agree that pretending that God exists is better than trying to cope with the horrors of life by turning to drink, drugs, sexual promiscuity, the lust for political power, etc.

 

[marke]

In the liberal, secular world of Hollywood, it’s rare to find any actor who is brave enough to be open about their faith in God. Hollywood tends to promote atheism as “cool” and Christianity as boringly conservative or even offensive. That’s why it was so refreshing to see legendary actor Sir Anthony Hopkins open up about his strong faith in God.

Faithwire reported that while appearing at the 11th annual LEAP Conference last week, Hopkins, 80, talked about how he went from being an outspoken atheist to believing in a higher power. Though he does not identify as a Christian, Hopkins did say that he strongly believes God exists.

During the appearance, Hopkins recounted the turning point in his life that came in 1975 as he sat in an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting where a woman asked him a deep question that changed his entire life.

“Why don’t you just trust in God?” the woman asked him. Hopkins explained from that moment onward, he no longer had any desire to consume alcohol.

Hopkins told the students at the conference that he thinks people “are capable of so much” and that he “cannot believe that my life is what it is because I should have died in Wales, drunk or something like that.” He can’t help but give credit to God for turning his life around during that powerful moment in 1975.

This isn’t the first time Hopkins has opened up about his beliefs in a higher power. While promoting his biblical movie Noah back in 2014, Hopkins said that his faith has gotten stronger as he ages.

“I feel every day, as I get older, anyway, that it’s all a miracle,” he explained. “I mean, my heart beats, my lungs breath. That is an extraordinary — an extraordinary phenomenon.”

https://www.tmn.today/2018/08/anthony-hopkins-faith-story/

Belief in a "higher power" should be the result of any reasonable consideration of the scientific fact of the emergence of matter and energy from nothing.

 

[zyzygy]

What the heck is hell?

A mythical place.

 

[zyzygy]

Belief in a "higher power" should be the result of any reasonable consideration of the scientific fact of the emergence of matter and energy from nothing.

It did not come from nothing.

 

[RAMOSS]

Belief in a "higher power" should be the result of any reasonable consideration of the scientific fact of the emergence of matter and energy from nothing.

Why do you think that 'nothing' ever existed?

 

[code1211]

WHICH IS WHY THERE IS NO FIRM BELIEF!!!!

How many ways do we have to say it?

Ergo: Faith.