"S888Wheel" wrote in message
...
From: "Michael McKelvy"
Date: 6/3/2004 8:33 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: k.net
Some time ago I was given much grief for positing the idea that the
Universe
could never have not existed, (an idea that seems fairly obvious to me).
Given grief? You were simply filled in on current scientific thought on
the
subject.
Then current scientific thought stated the impossible could be true, that
nothing could be the cause of something. That's bad science and I chose to
disbelive it. I still do.
Today, while in the waiting room of my doctor's office, I saw an issue of
Scientific American (May/04) with the following article, The Myth of The
Beginning of Time by Gabriele Veneziano.
The last paragraph reads: "So when did time begin? Science does not
have a
conclusive answer yet, but at least two testable theories, plausibly hold
that the universe existed before the Big Bang.
I don't offer this as proof of my view,
Good because it doesn't prove your view. In fact, it doesn't support your
view
or conflict with anything I already told you on the subject.
simply proof that the Big Bang as
the beginning of the Universe is not a universally held view as some of
you
would have had me believe.
The article you cite doesn't even support that assertion. The big bang is
quite
universally held as the begining of the universe as we know it by
astrophysicists.
Not by all, apparently.
That some scientists have some new theory of something
preceding the big bang does not change anything I or others have told you.
Nor does it make it true.
No
one I know of told you the big bang had to be the begfining of any
existance
only that popular scientific thought was that it very well may have been.
But
you do say that you see things in black and white and you may have
misunderstood what you were being told.
I understood it, it's wrong.
Used to be that scientific thought held that some races of people were
inferior to others.