| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. |
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
As at July 2007, article contains text "traced the Universe's expansion back nearly 8 billion light years." This reads like an error to me, as a light year is a distance, not a time. Can someone more knowledgeable fix this, or else confirm here that it's right? Ian Page 06:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Brian Schmidt goes to a music composer for pin balls games. Clearly that article should be named Brian Schmidt (music composer) and this article, now he has won a Nobel Prize, should be moved to Brian Schmidt. Do you agree? --Bduke (Discussion) 23:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
| None of this is about an improvement to the article |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Existence of God[edit]"I have been described by one of my colleagues as a "militant agnostic" with my tagline, "I don't know, and neither do you!". I take this hard-line, fence-sitting position because it is the only position consistent with both my scientific ethos and my conscience." Brian Schmidt on "God" A true agnostic wouldn't include "and neither do you!" Tony Rodi (talk) 08:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply] Atheism[edit]The belief that "God", as defined by an atheist, does not exist. Seems somewhat meaningless. Tony Rodi (talk) 23:50, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gronk Oz. Thanks for your interest. I’m just making a comment about Brian Schmidt’s assertion that if he doesn’t know whether “God” exists, then neither do you. I’m unsure whether that’s a warranted or fair comment. I've also made a comment on Atheism, or at least, atheists. But I think that Wikipedia’s article on Atheism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism, covers the gist of my comment quite well, under the following subheading. Viz:- Range "Some of the ambiguity and controversy involved in defining atheism arises from difficulty in reaching a consensus for the definitions of words like deity and god. The plurality of wildly different conceptions of God and deities leads to differing ideas regarding atheism's applicability. The ancient Romans accused Christians of being atheists for not worshiping the pagan deities. Gradually, this view fell into disfavour as theism came to be understood as encompassing belief in any divinity.[43] With respect to the range of phenomena being rejected, atheism may counter anything from the existence of a deity, to the existence of any spiritual, supernatural, or transcendental concepts, such as those of Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Taoism.[44]" I did find that the word “favour” is spelt incorrectly. i.e. “favor". Would you like to make the correction, or should I? Tony Rodi (talk) 07:56, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Gronk Oz Sorry about the misunderstanding. The word "disfavor" appears in the article on Atheism, not on Brian Schmidt's page, and neither was there any reference to atheism. I thought my comment was relevant in view of the comments on agnosticism. I suppose that comment should have been made on the article on atheism. I actually corrected the spelling on my post, but not on the article itself. I'll get back to you when I find the link to Brian Schmidt's article that referred to him as being agnostic, and declaring he had no knowledge of "God" and that consequently, "neither do you." I found that quote when I was looking for references to Brian Schmidt's much publicised assertion that mass simply manifested from "nothing", which he then suggested was really "something". The media reported that notion by a declaration that now that we knew that existence derived from "nothing", God as a primordial creator, was no longer necessary. I did find some forums on this theory, which expressed opinions suggesting that this was "nonsensical" and "hogwash" Thanks again. Tony Rodi (talk) 19:32, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Brian Schmidt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
