@rath, you beat me to it.

No shit, why wasn't it news when I said this?

This can only serve to reinforce beliefs on both sides of the debate, it will not change anyone's mind about anything.

But the fact is, the very nature of our universe is such that we can never fully understand why it exists.  We can search for, but can never find, a catalyst that led to our existence, because what then was the reason for that catalysts's existence?  The belief in God, or not, is based solely on faith and belief, not on intelligence.

You are not an theoretical physicist/cosmologist paralyzed with ALS who wrote a famous book in 1992. Get a degree in theoretical physics, pay a friend to take a sledge hammer to your legs and hip, write a book, and you just may be up there at Hawkings level.

Oh, I left out the part where you say, "IQ tests are for losers" making everyone think your the smartest guy to ever grace the planet.

Seriously, God bless Stephen Hawking. It takes a lot of courage, tenacity, and a big penis with grapefruit sized balls to be a public figure when you are in the condition he is in a world obssessed over image. I would have asked my relatives to give me a shotgun, a month's supply of marijuana, and wheel me out in the woods if I ever lost control of my lower body, especially my penis.

My my,  you sure are insensible.

I'm looking forward to reading this book.

No, because you don't have to prove a negative. The default position is not believing in God. The theists have to prove that God exists (since they're the one making the claim) and they haven't. The fact that they maintain its a position that requires faith (or a belief thats not supported by evidence) means that they make that very fact openly. So sure atheism is a belief, but a negative one, and its certainly not a faith. Since its simply the rejection of a claim and makes no claims itself about anything, there are no practices, proposed moral systems, holy texts etc.

EDIT now Hawkins here is simply saying that invoking God isn't neccesary and that the universe can create itself without God. That doesn't seem to be a claim that God does or doesn't exist and really we'd need to read his book to be sure.

Read the negative and positive energy quote...

That's not even remotely true.  About Einstein.

Einstein believed in a god.  He just didn't believe in any specific god.

Either way, the book should be interesting, though it appears to be built more on conjecture then fact at this point.  For example the talk of multiple universes when there hasn't even been a shred of evidence pointing to that yet.  It will be intersting if he has some new info on that.

Adittionally, you're thread is misleading... as Hawking's position is basically "How the universe is set up means god doesn't need to create the universe".

Which you know... the article you posted states... you never seem to read your own sources past like the first couple paragraphs in a rush to make a point.

"But some of Hawking's Cambridge colleagues said the physicist has missed the point.

"The 'god' that Stephen Hawking is trying to debunk is not the creator God of the Abrahamic faiths who really is the ultimate explanation for why there is something rather than nothing," said Denis Alexander."