On Sat, Jun 14, 2008 at 9:53 PM, david buchanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Krimel said to Ham: > ...The Big Bang can easily be conceived as an uncaused first cause that is > neither absolute nor undifferentiated. It is the instant of the birth of > spacetime. While the Big Bang is a "theory." It is supported by lots of > evidence. It does accord with the universe as it is currently understood. It > does make verifiable predications about future states. It serves all of the > functions of your "Essence" without the quasi-religious overtones. > > Platt replied: > A wonderful description of the "Oops Theory" of being. An uncaused first > cause is something supernatural for sure. But don't tell that to the > priests of science. > > dmb says: > Yea, the "first cause" is more or less the God of the philosophers, the God > of the Deists. The Big Bang theory, however, is entirely natural. That's > exactly why religious people dislike it so much. The only unknown, the only > area about which there is no overwhelming consensus, is what happened in the > first fraction of a second, a tiny fraction. Other than that, the theory > successfully organizes all the data about what happened going back billions > of years. I mean, the word "theory" actually carries a lot of weight in the > scientific world and it refers to a successful, working idea that is very > far from anything like a guess or a hunch or faith. Despite Platt's > implications, a theory is something that makes sense of all that is known, > all the facts and data gathered about a given phenomenon. A theory is the > best and most fully developed explanation. Its not the absolute truth, > whatever that is. But its positively shameful to go around mocking the big > bang (or evolution) because its "just" a theory. People will laugh at that > and ridicule that. And rightly so. Platt responds: No problem with the theory. It's good as far as it goes. But, it doesn't go far enough. It doesn't explain why the Big Bang happened in the first place. What caused it? What went "bang?" How could it have created time when it takes time to create? Since science has no answers, the event itself must be characterized as supernatural. Why science is afraid to admit its ignorance is a mystery. The very notion of quality itself that every schoolgirl understands is beyond the ken of science, as is much else that touches the heart and makes life worth living. Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
