1. Comment #434411 by Mitch Kahle on November 24, 2009 at 5:59 am

Aloha Victor,

Great to see you.

Mitch

Other Comments by Mitch Kahle

2. Comment #434425 by s1mon on November 24, 2009 at 7:44 am

The last clip isn't Q&A part 2!

Other Comments by s1mon

3. Comment #434434 by Shiva on November 24, 2009 at 8:48 am

Will check later!

Other Comments by Shiva

4. Comment #434456 by DrawingYou on November 24, 2009 at 11:05 am

I wish I could have a leisure conversation with the good Dr. Stenger. I think it would be intoxicating.

Other Comments by DrawingYou

5. Comment #434464 by bouwe on November 24, 2009 at 12:03 pm

Is that Matt Dilahunty sitting in the background to the right of the podium? Or maybe it's the Buddha, I can't tell the difference. (Check out The Atheist Experience podcast/TV show - great stuff.)

Other Comments by bouwe

6. Comment #434483 by Big Gus on November 24, 2009 at 1:26 pm

Is that a miracle I see at 1:14 in part 1? A Darwin T Shirt is materialized on the left of shot.

Other Comments by Big Gus

7. Comment #434547 by Sally Luxmoore on November 24, 2009 at 5:07 pm

Interesting about the dishonesty of christian speakers who have been corrected more than once about their mistaken views of science and yet who continue to spout the same untruths because their arguments depend upon them.
Lying for Jebus again...

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

8. Comment #434759 by VrijzinnigMan on November 25, 2009 at 6:03 am

Is that a miracle I see at 1:14 in part 1. A Darwin T Shirt is materialized on the left of shot.

This is actually a T shirt of the host organization for the Texas Freethought Convention, the Freethinkers Association of Central Texas. If you look closely, you can see FACT inside the Darwin fish. They are for sale for the modest price of $15 (see www.freethinkersact.org)

Other Comments by VrijzinnigMan

9. Comment #434776 by Follow Peter Egan on November 25, 2009 at 9:16 am

Wonderful talk, it's always good to hear these great minds convey their ideas verbally. I haven't read any of Stenger's work yet, though I will rectify this gap in my knowledge next year (Herodotus and Richard Leakey will keep me occupied for the next month or so).

I especially enjoyed his pithy rebuttals to the weak arguments of the likes of Dinesh D'Souza. Good to see an old warrior like Stenger not taking them seriously.

Other Comments by Follow Peter Egan

10. Comment #434853 by andersemil on November 25, 2009 at 1:40 pm

Stenger is speaking next summer in Copenhagen, along with AC Grayling and PZ Myers, if anyone wants to visit :)

Other Comments by andersemil

11. Comment #435397 by retep57 on November 26, 2009 at 10:59 am

this is good, i must keep the "irrational nonsense" lable ready for use , no more deference, no more deference, no more deference to those talking irrational nonsense, ok i got it! must use the the "irrational nonsense" quote at work tomorrow.
cheers

Other Comments by retep57

12. Comment #435504 by Steve Zara on November 26, 2009 at 5:21 pm

I do enjoy what he has to say. What he says, most of the time, includes such effective refutations of theism, such as that of course absence of evidence is evidence of absence!

However, I do wish he would not put forward his own personal views of physics as if they were unqualified facts. For example, it is by no means certain that the universe started from a chaotic state. The question of entropy close to and at the origin of the universe is a difficult one, and other significant physicists like Roger Penrose disagree with his point of view.

Stenger talks about the quantum nature of the initial state of the universe, and how there is no singularity. But what Penrose says is that the properties of spacetime as you approach that quantum state matter in terms of entropy. As you approach whatever quantum state is at the centre of a black hole (collapsing spacetime), spacetime becomes extremely chaotic, but that doesn't work in terms of entropy if you approach backwards in time the quantum state at the origin of the universe - that expanding spacetime must be in a state of very, very low entropy - in other words, not chaotic. No matter who is right, there is at least significant disagreement about this.

So my view is that Stenger should at least include some qualifications of such statements, otherwise he is potentially misleading people about the scientific consensus (or lack if it) about entropy and the origin of the universe.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

13. Comment #435531 by VrijzinnigMan on November 26, 2009 at 7:22 pm

So my view is that Stenger should at least include some qualifications of such statements, otherwise he is potentially misleading people about the scientific consensus (or lack if it) about entropy and the origin of the universe.

Point well taken. However, Stenger expressing only his views on the matter shows that there is at least one plausible explanation for how it all began.

Other Comments by VrijzinnigMan

14. Comment #435535 by Steve Zara on November 26, 2009 at 7:38 pm

Comment #435531 by VrijzinnigMan

Yes, and what Stenger says about the initial state of the universe being quantum rather than singular is uncontroversial.

It is very revealing that so many prominent theist debaters simply conveniently forget this. Lying for Jesus.

Other Comments by Steve Zara