Richard Meic discussing "Time and Again        1/2" with Keith Knapp...
 KK>> I think Lerner overstates it somewhat.
 RM> Sure, but the refutational data that the Bigbagers don't want you to
 RM> know is there,... and on the internet if you are a persistent searcher.
 RM> ;)
Maybe you'd like to post some of it in here so we can make our own 
dgements?
 KK>> Yeah, but it's also done by human beings, who sometimes fall in love
 KK>> with hypotheses.  One of the great virtues of scientific methodology is
 KK>> that science can correct itself.
 RM>    Right, and my view is that they are not FOLLOWING the scientific
 RM> method.
Who's "they"? Big Bangers? I think you should read up on it a bit before you 
start saying scientists are deliberately ignoring things, or at least, post 
what you think they are ignoring.
 KK>> mathematics, but it doesn't work in science, where the only real test
 KK>> is whether the model fits what the universe is actually doing.
 RM>                     Hey, not being an astrophysicist and not having
 RM> access to the time,  money for the education, or the equipment leaves me
 RM> with very little to  work with,... I am left with logic.
Have you read about the double-slit experiment? It DEFIES logic.
 KK>> I don't read physics journals because I have no idea what they're
 KK>> saying, 
 RM> Ditto here, man.
Yet, you think you're in a position to refute scientific ideas and to dispute 
the Big Bang model?
    Relatif Tuinn
... Avoid the company of deluded people when you can. When you cannot,
    keep your own counsel.
--- Spot 1.3a #1413
---------------