Why the exaggeration?
Nobody is attempting to prevent any scientist from offering his personal opinions about philosophy or religion. Many scientists in a wide variety of specialties have written or spoken about their personal faith or lack of faith, and on the ways their scientific studies have contributed to the formation of their views.
The author’s concern is that people’s socially-conditioned respect for expertise may lead them to the erroneous conclusion that Dr. Hawking - not even an unchallenged authority in his own speciality - is nonetheless more qualified than themselves to weigh in on questions of philosophy and religion.
So tell me, who is less qualified to discuss the existence of God, Hawking or perhaps these folks?
Marjoe Gortner,
Billy James Hargis
Jim & Tammy Bakker
Jimmy Swaggert
Peter Popoff
Morris Cerullo
Mike Warnke
Robert Tilton
W. V. Grant
Bob Moorehead
Roy Clements
John Paulk
Paul Crouch
Douglas Goodman
Ted Haggard
And the list goes on ad nauseum and doesn’t even include the catholic pedophiles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm desperately trying to find significance in worship and an appropriate church but there is nothing I have witnessed in recent years that convinces me a house of worship or specific religion has any more credibility than the theories of scientists such as Hawking..........
I don't mean to change the subject but what makes Christianity any more credible than say Hinduism or Buddhism? All three religions require a blind faith belief in their respective Gods.......