Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - Atheist sees image of Big Bang in piece of toast

Calgaryborn · 02-17-2008, 01:29 AM

photon here is a part of an article by Eric Lerner in the NewScience from May 2004:

Bucking the big bang

22 May 2004
Eric Lerner
Magazine issue 2448

BIG bang theory relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities - things that we have never observed. Inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent. Without them, there would be fatal contradictions between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.
But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed,

Unfortunately the rest of the article requires a subscription but, as of May 2004 the background radiation was smooth. I wish you could read the whole article because Dr. Lerner speaks in length about the difficulty of being heard within the scientific community if you dare question the big bang theory. He also identifies why there is so much resistance. Two thing I've been trying to tell you for a while now but, you keep denying the problem. I'm confident that if Dr. Lerner was a Creationist the difficulty he finds today would turn into an impossibilty.

By the way, if the link I provided was unscientific because it started with "a presumption of truth" do you think your post passes as scientific using the same standard?

02-17-2008, 01:29 AM	#72
Calgaryborn Lifetime Suspension Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Creston Exp:	photon here is a part of an article by Eric Lerner in the NewScience from May 2004: Bucking the big bang 22 May 2004 Eric Lerner Magazine issue 2448 BIG bang theory relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities - things that we have never observed. Inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent. Without them, there would be fatal contradictions between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory. But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, Unfortunately the rest of the article requires a subscription but, as of May 2004 the background radiation was smooth. I wish you could read the whole article because Dr. Lerner speaks in length about the difficulty of being heard within the scientific community if you dare question the big bang theory. He also identifies why there is so much resistance. Two thing I've been trying to tell you for a while now but, you keep denying the problem. I'm confident that if Dr. Lerner was a Creationist the difficulty he finds today would turn into an impossibilty. By the way, if the link I provided was unscientific because it started with "a presumption of truth" do you think your post passes as scientific using the same standard?