On 31 Jul 2006 11:05:25 -0700, TomS <TomS_member@newsguy.com> wrote:
"On 31 Jul 2006 07:31:05 -0700, in article
<1154356265.726204.301740@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
Codebreaker@bigsecret.com stated..."
Big bang not testable either... Evolution is even worse in term of
testability.
What make them Science then?
[...snip...]
I am curious as to why there is this senseless opposition to the Big Bang.
Doctrine trumps reality. But instead of keeping quiet about it they
feel they have to in-your-face attack those who simply accept where
reality leads.
After all, before the evidence started to accumulate for BB, the assumption
was that there was no beginning in time to the universe. Einstein, famously,
introduced the Cosmological Constant so that General Relativity would be
consistent with an infinitely old, steady-state universe. Wouldn't the EAC
be in favor of "no beginning"?
.
