Such scientific knowledge paired with pragmatic humility and a fantastic ability to articulate in understandable terms. Hia death was a tremendous loss for humanity.
"...the veil that clouds your eyes shall be lifted by the hands that wove it, and the clay that fills your ears shall be pierced by those fingers that kneaded it. And you shall see, and you shall hear, yet you shall not deplore having known blindness, not regret having been deaf. For in that day, you shall know the hidden purposes of all things, and you shall bless darkness as you would bless light." Now, Carl know the hidden purposes of all things. RIP, Carl
How right he was. How passionate he was. How knowledgeable he was. How saddened he was with the state of affairs and the future. Yet how composed he was in articulating his views.
I hate trying to prove somebody wrong, especially if it is a great person with exceptional intellectual way of thinking, the man I personally have a lot respect such as Carl Sagan. Yes, I agree that believes comes from the absence of evidence but at the same time with no faith there is no science. Good scientist must have faith, must believe that the answer on his questions exists somewhere and that it is destined to be found. Religion does not pretend to know something about science because religion is a part of science and both does not contradict each other because there is no evidence on both sides of this unlikely unity. Both sides ask the identical questions echoing in different answers. No approach is wrong and both answers are acceptable. Religion's echo is closer to the human nature (phenomenon) while science echo is closer to th perceived reality or in philosophical terms noumenon. Both suffers from the luck of the evidence and religion offers a dogma while science offers an axiom. Any of them can not be proved. Humans must not discard any approach that could lead to finding the truth, as Carl tried to discard religion, spirituality or philosophy and place science as a single source of the truth.
@@zyxw2000 Ive see, heard and read all he had to say publicly on the subject…even as a non religious person I find his attitude condescending toward those that are
i think science tells us energy cannot be destroyed, so i am confused by how we are to be destroyed by death. i think our universe demonstrates cycles, which i choose to interpret as an indicator of recyclement. i personally believe, that as carl sagan died, he was retracted into the unknown otherdimensional ether, to yet again be reinserted into new life.
Humanity can still learn from this brilliant human being. Sadly, the important truth he speaks cannot be digested by most and all one need do is listen.
Please watch and share with others my five brief videos in which I present examples of scientific facts contained in the Bible, facts that the writers thousands of years ago could not have been aware of without divine knowledge given to them by Jesus Christ / The God of the Bible. And today's scientists agree with those facts!
Fyi i have video of ray kurzweils funeral and yet i saw an article online today claiming hes alive, hes not he died years ago wtf is going on does no one else see this ???
I really can't stand Charlie Rose's interviews. He tries to second guess his guests, he interrupts them, and tries to give the impression that he is in the know. I have no idea how he remained so popular over the years by doing this.
reality is what it is independant of belief. honest philosophies recognize this and seek to comprehend what is likely true of reality regardless of what they might wish to be true
God fearing 😂The unknown is where we should go! Without fear but with amazement and curiosity. A god we should believe in is our own truth. Kindness and love is free. Science has a price we must pay for to find the truth.
I don't believe in any God. I am not pro, nor anti-intelligent design or evolution. I simply don't know, as you don't either. That being said, I reject God as the intelligent designer. I don't believe in magic. However, who is to say that life on Earth wasn't accidentally seeded by panspermia? Maybe some past intelligent alien civilization cracked the code? Is intelligent design really denying evolution? Perhaps it still was originally designed, but it evolved into something better, more efficient. Perhaps it was designed to evolve? It certainly didn't evolve from nothing. That's ridiculous and illogical. It would take a miracle. I guess you guys are even more creationist than the creationists themselves, with your Big Bang... When building something, anything, there has to be a purpose, and an intervention. How do you explain a motor simply building itself to move that flagellum? The sensors, the rotation (100,000 rpm), without any intervention? Really? It's easy to claim all needed is millions of years, very easy. Leave those building blocks there and come back in a billion years, chances are there won't be anything there anymore. Nothing will happen.
