afterlife and Hawking debate

Litigation lawyer Victor Zamets crossed examination of Professor Stephen Hawking Dash. On the claim by Prof Hawking that there is no after life. It is submitted that the following is what a cross examination of Professor Stephen Hawking would be like. The answers given by Professor Hawking have been taken from his website and from other media reports about things he said and imputed. Fellow, any words in capital refers to quitting emphasis on that word. Court room scene Professor Hawking pictured below in the witness box being sworn in. Judge, looking towards his attendant, swear the witness him. Court is system to dressing expert witness Professor Hawking, to use where to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God. Pro Hawking, I don't believe in God. Judge, a court attendant, proceed with that affirmation and oath design for atheists. Victor, friendly, smiling, how are you Professor? You feel alright. Professor, yes, I do. Why do you ask? Victor, I want to establish for the purpose of the record that while there are problems with your body, you are in a good state of mind to answer all questions. Right. Professor, yes, I'm an excellent state of mind. Victor, good. Tell us Professor. Are you intelligent? Professor, yes, I suppose I am. Victor, would you agree that some scientists who agree with your theories say that you are extremely intelligent? In fact, some scientists even call you a genius. Professor, I'll leave that to those scientists who call me that. Victor, but have you come across scientists who described you as a genius, yes, or no. Yes, Victor, what kind of a scientist are you? Prof, I am a theoretical physicist. Victor, what do you mean by that? Prof, I study theoretical physics, especially cosmology. Victor, you are famous for your cosmic theories. So when you come to conclusions about cosmology, you first investigate? Prof, yes, that's absolutely right. Victor, do you ever come to conclusions about some aspect of the universe without first having studied it? Prof, no, of course not. That would be ridiculous. I cannot make conclusions unless I first study the area. I'm a scientist. Victor, but being a theoretical physicist specializing in cosmology, would you not agree that some of what you conclude about the universe is theoretical. Is speculated since you cannot duplicate your results in a laboratory? Prof, hesitating, yes, I guess that's right. Victor, for example, you mention black holes, and what they do. But that is only speculated because you have never seen the full operation of a black hole you are speculating right. Prof, I suppose so but I can show you why I am right. Victor, but you can never guarantee that your conclusions on black holes are absolute and irreversible that they are 100% correct right? Prof, softly, I guess yes, that's right. Victor, you said earlier you are qualified in theoretical physics. Prof, are you qualified in law, do you have a law degree? Prof, of course not. Victor, so you do not have the professional expertise to know what technically constitutes admissible evidence and the process of litigation. Prof, as I said, I don't have any knowledge of law or of litigation procedure. Victor, this means that a litigation lawyer would have the professional expertise about what is admissible in evidence as objective and subjective evidence more than a theoretical physicist, right? Prof, I guess so it's quite obvious to me. Victor, you are answer is yes. Professor, yes. Victor, are you qualified in medicine? Prof, of course not. Looks at the judge and asks, you are on her, do I have to answer these questions? Victor, you are on her, the question of objective authority is critical in this matter. Judge, yes, yes, I understand answer the question. Prof, no, I am not qualified in medicine. Victor, professor, are you formally qualified in architecture, engineering, biology, advanced chemistry, advanced philosophy? Prof, no, I am not qualified in any of these except I know something about chemistry. Victor, you agree then, that you are only area of professional expertise as in an arrow area of theoretical physics in cosmological science, yes? Prof, as a dating. Victor, answer the question, professor, yes or no. Prof, yes, my expertise is only in theoretical physics in cosmology. Victor, would you be familiar with what is objective evidence and subjective evidence? Prof, yes, yes, I would be. Victor, would you agree that what is scientific is consistent with using the same formula over time and space? Keeping very abolved constant and getting the same results? Prof, yes, I agree with that. Victor, by contrast, would you agree that a personal belief, such as blind faith, which cannot be independently supported would and itself be subject to invalidation, to complete invalidation, yes, or no? Prof, yes, yes, I agree with that. Victor, so, you agree that any statement you make as a layperson could be absolutely wrong? Yes? Prof, I guess so, yes. Victor, do you make mistakes as a scientist, professor? Prof, I've made mistakes in the past. Victor, do you make mistakes when you make statements not related to your theoretical science? Prof, everybody makes mistakes. Victor, you are answer is yes? Prof, yes. So, you accept that you make mistakes as a scientist and when you make statements as an on scientist? Right? Prof, right, yes. Victor, from what you said, you can see that you can make statements as a layperson or a scientist that could be absolutely incorrect they could be wrong? Prof, I suppose so. Victor, you work quoted in the media recently that you do not accept the existence of the afterlife. Is that correct? Prof, yes, that's correct. Victor, would you accept that cosmological theoretical physics has absolutely nothing to do with knowledge about the afterlife? Prof? Yes, I accept that. Victor, you agree, that the two are completely independent and totally separate from each other and are inevitably unrelated. Prof, yes, that's right. Victor, so, does being an expert in scientific cosmology give you any authority whatsoever whether or not the afterlife exists? Prof, no, it does not. Victor, you are also in record for stating words to the effect those who accept the afterlife are likely to be afraid of the dark. You said that? Prof, yes, I said that too. But, Victor, don't say but no qualification and no justification to the enter please, again, enter yes, or no to my question. Did you say those who accept the afterlife are likely to be afraid of the dark? Prof, yes. Victor, I remind you, you are under oath. Listen carefully. Have you ever investigated the evidence for the afterlife professor? Yes or no, please. Prof, no. Victor, no. Just a while ago I you called someone who comes to conclusions without first investigating, a fool, and ridiculous. Prof, no answer. Victor, no need to answer that, the jury accepts you answered that already. Have you ever asked your research assistant or anybody else what literature is available about the afterlife? Prof, no, I have not. Victor, have you ever read the class of afterlife research a lawyer presents the case for the afterlife, presenting some 20 areas of afterlife evidence? Prof, no, I have not. Victor, do you know Professor, that the afterlife evidence in this book by litigation lawyer, in 11 years has never been reported by any materialist genius scientist, not even for the allurement of $1 million. Prof? No, I don't know that. Victor, how would you like to her make cool a million dollars professor? Prof, what do I have to do? Victor, you only have to rub at the evidence for the existence of the afterlife presented by that lawyer? Got the courage? Prof, maybe. Victor, what's the matter professor? Are you an intellectual coward or have you been professional negligent or both when it comes to the afterlife? Judge, professor, you do not have to answer that question. Victor, you don't have to. I accept the jury also accepts that the professor answered that question already. Prof, I'm not an intellectual coward. Victor, do you think it is right for you to create a kind of a kind of a kind of old without being responsible for what you say and do? Prof does not answer. Victor, some intellectuals and others would call that coward to push to a extreme agree with that professor. Prof does not answer. Victor? We are waiting all right, we'll let the jury answer that for us with their verdict have you done any research about the afterlife. Prof? No. Victor, why not? Too lazy. I'm not lazy. Victor, why then did you not bother to review the most fundamental and substantive scientific evidence for the afterlife before you made a conclusion about something you know absolutely not thing about? Prof? No answer. Victor, you shock all of us with your afterlife knowledge. You stated earlier that professional litigation lawyers are the professionals who know what is admissible objective and subjective evidence. Right? Prof? Yes, right. Victor, then why did you investigate the works of the lawyer who presented the evidence for the afterlife? Someone would professional expertise about admissible evidence for the afterlife. Prof? Silent? Victor, you're on earth. Judge? Yes, yes. Professor answered the question. Prof? Silent? Judge? I will hold you in contempt unless you answer the question put a you. Prof? I admit I did not do any research about the afterlife. Victor, just assume for one moment that the hundred or so scientists who accepted the objective and repeat a evidence for the afterlife are right, would you accept the evidence for the existence of the afterlife? Prof? I would have to examine the evidence. Victor, just answer yes or no to that question. Prof? I would have to answer yes I guess. Professor, Victor, have you come across a recent book by British scientist Ron Pearson? Why if has it approved God? Professor, no I have not. Victor, have you read the brilliant physicists' surallever launches masterpiece? Why he accepts the afterlife? Prof? No, I have not. Victor, have you ever read about the materialization experiments of that great scientist Sir William Crook switch led him to accept the evidence for the existence of the afterlife? Prof? No. Victor, have you read the brilliant work of Professor Yon W. Vanders and he's after life research? Prof? No, I have not. Victor, have you ever read the most brilliant proof for the afterlife we have in the world today? David Thomson's miracle materializations were the evidence as objective and repeatable? Prof? No, I have not. Victor, you haven't? Why not? Prof does not answer. Victor, never mind, the jury heard you answering that one, have you ever read our third-of-and-lay's great work sound has empirical evidence for the afterlife? Prof? No, I have not. Victor, have you read the most impressive scientific afterlife for search-up professor and sink-housekey? Prof? No, I have not. Victor, then what clearly follows is that you do not have authority about the afterlife, right? Please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please, please