On 12 Jan 2021 at 04:50:12 GMT, The Natural Philosopher 
wrote:

> On 11/01/2021 22:04, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

>>  That nicely takes care of creation science...
>>
> Well no.
>
> In the end conventional science versus creation science is about what
> you find the most inconceivable - a Big Bang N billion years ago in
> which a broken symmetry started time in the exact way it appears, or a
> supernal Being who dreamed it all up a few thousand years ago and faked
> it to *look like* it was N billion years old. Or whatever the current
> figure is.

If you're one of those who is going to accept that it all started  in 4004 BC,
then it would be equally valid to accept that it all started 2 seconds ago, no
I mean 3, sorry, no hold on, 4 secs ago.

And so on.

But then such people would probably be unable to answer *why* the Supremem
Being bothered to fake it up to look like billyuns.

--
Tim

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05