(April 29, 2012 at 7:28 pm)Norfolk And Chance Wrote: What exactly is your point? Yes the Big Bang is theory, but it is supported by evidence and repeated testing that produces predictable results. You have invested far too much into "conceived by human imagination" and are completely blowing off the fact that it is then subjected to testing etc.ALTER2EGO -to- NORFOLK AND CHANCE:
It is not just "some shit that some blokes made up, to answer the unanswerable questions", unlike your bible.
What "repeated testing that produces predictable results" are you referring to in which space is known to expand--without guidance from an intelligent source? No such evidence exists.
What the scientists have been able to test and predict are preexisting universal laws, which they then apply to the behavior of planets and the expansion of space. Who put those laws in place? Laws and precision indicate an intelligent personage guided the outcome. Big Bang Theory relies on spontaneous events in which one accident after the other happened at the right place and at the right time. I can tell you this: it takes more faith to believe precision was the result of spontaneous events, so you're in worse shape than I am.
Not only do scientists not know who put those laws in place so that precision is the result, to top it off, some of their predictions are wrong. Do you think I dismiss Big Bang Theory just for the sake of it? It defies logic that unguided events aka accidents could produce precision. Besides that, I've read several of these reports, and I pay close attention to the language used in the reports. Take, for example, the WMAP Project.
Quote:As of October 2010, the WMAP spacecraft is in a graveyard orbit after 9 years of operations. The Astronomy and Physics Senior Review panel at NASA Headquarters has endorsed a total of 9 years of WMAP operations, through September 2010.[3] All WMAP data are released to the public and have been subject to careful scrutiny. Recent examinations of WMAP data has uncovered systematic errors. A predictable, scan-induced quadrupole pattern of the WMAP mission is in perfect agreement with the published WMAP quadrupole. Scan-induced anisotropy is a common problem for all sweep missions and like the foreground emissions, should be removed from final maps.[12] Some of the correction techniques and analyses by critics have been duplicated by third parties and appear correct.[13] After corrections all that remains is a nearly featureless surface and hence much less information than originally published.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilkinson_Microwave_Anisotropy_Probe
http://www.scribd.com/Muths999999/d/79167303-C-L-Bennett-et-al-Seven-Year-Wilkinson-Microwave-Anisotropy-Probe-WMAP-Observations-Are-There-Cosmic-Microwave-Background-Anomalies
