Ok it's cut and paste i'm not Steven Hawking so can't give you the origonal.
No Stephen Hawking, God Did Create the Universe!
by Eric Hovind on September 29, 2010 in Articles, Beginner Imagine insurmountable rows of slot machines and the only way to win is to hit the jackpot 250 times in a row. The odds are against you. Yet, these are the same odds that would have to be overcome for the simplest life-form to evolve and form each of 250 proteins by random chance. It’s seemingly impossible. (From the documentary “Expelled” )
Though the premise above is irrational and illogical, the entire “theory” of evolution depends on the same “logic.” Evolutionists call Biblically based creation “religion” and dismiss the text in Genesis as “folk tales.” Yet they and other intellectuals, including physicist Stephen Hawking, base their “science” on their belief that creation sprang from nothing in a “big bang”! Who’s making up stories now? (See Romans 1:20-22)
The latest intellectual brainstorm
Hawking’s latest book, The Grand Design, states plainly: God did not create the universe. It has been called in reviews as “a frontal attack on Christianity.” But the very title of his tome infers that creation was and is designed; therefore, it must have a designer. Even the reportedly smartest man of our age cannot contain the contradictions, which blow “black holes” in his science.
Hawking writes, “The question is: is the way the universe began chosen by God for reasons we can’t understand, or was it determined by a law of science? I believe the second.” Hawking adds, “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing.” So, Professor Hawking, who is the Lawgiver in your scheme? Nothingness cannot begat everything. That is illogical and unproven.
Grounds for divorce?
An interesting biographical note about Stephen Hawking is revealed by his first wife, Jane. Even though she married Hawking in 1965, after his diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS, or known in America as Lou Gehrig’s disease), she bravely cared for him until their divorce in 1991. In the book by Tim Adams, A Brief History of a First Wife, it states, “ took much of her dramatic hope at the time from her faith, and still sees something of the irony in the fact that her Christianity gave her the strength to support her husband, the most profound atheist. ‘Stephen, I hope, had belief in me that I could make everything possible for him, but he did not share my religious – or spiritual – faith.'”
Science and religion can be partners
As Dr. Kent Hovind has proven in his Creation Seminars, scientific data proves that heaven and earth were created in the timeframe stated in the Bible, in the way that is explained therein. Hovind, a science teacher for 15 years, has rationalized his academic lessons with those of the Bible. The results are evident throughout the Creation Seminar series.
More complex than science can prove
Today, we are learning more and more about what it takes for life to form. Beyond the statistical improbabilities of evolution, we’ve learned that the single cell is not at all like a mud hut, but rather more complex than a galaxy. In fact, for a single wing of a dinosaur to evolve, all five systems in a cell would have to change identically at the same time. Something that Darwin could never have imagined. (From the documentary “Expelled”)
The Bible repeatedly refers to God’s creation throughout the Old and New Testaments (Example: See Acts 17:24-28). Just as a parent silences the child’s constant question of “Why?” because a child’s mind would not understand the answer, God also tells us truths without explanation (Romans 1:19-20). Even the sharpest minds of our species cannot grasp the divine intelligence that is God.
If you are fishing for any tit bits of information about what happened or didn't happen between a certain lady and myself , i must tell you it's none of your business and neither of us will tell you anything.
Australia will make it more difficult to gain citizenship in a major overhaul of its migration process. Aspiring citizens will undergo tougher tests on their English language skills and ability to demonstrate "Australian values", PM Malcolm Turnbull said.
Applicants must also have completed four years as a permanent resident - three years longer than at present. The move comes two days after Australia unveiled stricter visa requirements for skilled workers from overseas.
Mr Turnbull said the changes would ensure that migrants were better integrated into the community. "It is important that they understand that they are making a commitment to our Australian values," he said. What are the changes?
In explaining what constituted "Australian values", Mr Turnbull said migrants must demonstrate support for religious freedom and gender equality.
"Respect for women and children ... that is a key Australian value," he said, adding domestic violence would not be tolerated.
What exactly are 'Australian values'?
Other changes to the citizenship process include : A more stringent English language test involving reading, writing, listening and speaking;
Providing evidence of integration into the community, such as employment history, school enrolment or membership of community organisations;
Having already been a permanent resident for at least four years; Allowing applicants to apply only three times, and automatically failing anyone who cheats on a test.
Former British Ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, refused to go along with the BBC propaganda on Syria and dropped a truth bomb live on air yesterday.
Fed up with the state sponsored propaganda from the very start, Peter Ford dispensed with niceties and disagreed on every level possible with the very first question put to him by the BBC host.
Referring to claims that Assad is responsible for the chemical attack in Syria, the BBC host said, “That’s a statement of fact, right?”
Wrong.
“It’s a myth,” Ford said, his voice thick with disgust for mainstream media idiocy and lies.
“It’s a statement of non-fact,” he continued, immediately rocking the host back on his heels.
“What’s needed is an investigation, because there are two possibilities for what happened. One is the American version, that Assad dropped chemical weapons on this locality. The other version is that an ordinary bomb was dropped and it hit a munitions dump where jihadis were storing chemical weapons. We don’t know which of these two possibilities is the correct one.
“Remember the run up to Iraq. The experts, the intelligence agencies, the politicians were convinced that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. They produced reams of evidence, photographs, diagrams. They were all wrong. It was all wrong. It’s possible that they are wrong in this instance as well. That they are just looking for a pretext to attack Syria.”
That was more truth than the BBC usually broadcasts in a week. Aware the truth quotient was way too high for his superiors’ liking, the BBC host went into damage control mode, and started reading from the same script CNN and MSNBC hosts use whenever a guest dares to go against the deep state approved narrative.
That’s right, the desperate mainstream media host accused Peter Ford, the former British Ambassador to Syria, of being a Russian operative.
aries1234 Forum Posts (5,672)
Jealousy issues.
Just pump her up again lol