Dear Brad Guth:

On Tuesday, June 11, 2013 9:06:45 AM UTC-7, Brad Guth wrote:
....
Mainstream science and even its physics is highly
dependent upon the Big Bang, even though there's
nothing objectively supporting the BB.

Say what?

In other words, we get to make do with our
mainstream of circular logic instead of objective
proof of anything that truly matters.

We can use actual data to get us back to a few hundred million years of the CMBR. And this data without "assuming" a Big Bang, points to a much smaller Universe at that time.

Beyond this CMBR curtain, Science does not do "proof", you know this, yet you continue posturing. We have theory where we have data, and cosmology (including the Big Bang) is largely "extrapolation" at best.

Does lying include what you think "truly matters"? Please do not continue to present Science arriving at any sort of proof, or failing because it *never* can do this. Only Religion, Philosophy, and Law have proofs.

David A. Smith