On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 11:49:39 GMT, greywolf42
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:
Morgoth wrote in message
...
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:00:26 GMT, greywolf42
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:
Elementary, Watson!
Only one problem with your allegory. The body is not a hypothetical
event
that took place in the past. It is a very local, current, direct
observation. It is data, not the 'event.' The 'event' is the past
*cause*
of the dead body that we see in the present. No one (present) witnessed
the
event. Hence, we must theorize.
Do you tell that to all the historians and archaeologists that you
meet?
I certainly would in the above described situation (which you snipped).
Yet you are claiming that there is a fundamental difference between
human-observed data/events and non-human-observed data/events.
Whither there is anyone in the forest or not, the tree still falls!
In the case of the hypothetical 'big bang', the 'event' is the initial
expansion of the 'cosmic egg'. The 'body' is the universe as we see it.
No
one present witnessed the event. Hence we must theorize. The 'big bang'
is
one such theory.
Supported by literally humungous amounts of evidence, old chap.
However, it is still only a theory.
So is gravity. So is heliocentralism. So even is general relativity.
As I wrote in the prior post (and you
snipped):
"In the case of the hypothetical 'big bang', the 'event' is the initial
expansion of the 'cosmic egg'. The 'body' is the universe as we see it. No
one present witnessed the event. Hence we must theorize. The 'big bang' is
one such theory."
But what is your problem? It is not a theory because no one present
witnessed it. The Fall of Rome is not a theory, but no one alive has
witnessed it.
For
example, the observed abundances of light elements, the CRB and so and
so on.
Those two examples are not predictions of the Big Bang. The Big Bang was
reinvented with new ad hoc assumptions in order to meet those observations.
Not so. They are explained by the Big Bang.
And so and so on.
But if you wish to come up with an alternative for the big-bang you
must account for the above, and none of the alternatives can do so.
Best,
Dave
I could have said the same for the Ptolemaic system.
greywolf42
ubi dubium ibi libertas
Author of the Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - B&W Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html