Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
Creationist, no way.
How did you read that from what I have been saying?
|
My apologies if you take offense. I just found it odd, every time I would mention "Big Bang"
in any form, you appeared to sound off in a contrarian way and Always spit out one paper
(that typically didn't supply any corroboration to what you were saying).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
My thoughts are on a recycling process that we can obser[e]ve on star formation and the various phases and galaxy evolution of different forms that are directly related to the size and activity of the ultra dense core that some call black holes.
|
An oscillating universe of some kind is fine with me. However, you have to take all evidence into account - - WMAP, CMB, etc.
So oscillate is OK -
how I think is the
Most important part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pluto
If you have read the link.
What evidence are you refering to?
|
In regards to the link you mentioned
Evidence for the Big Bang
everything from section 2.0 on is there evidence and quite accurate and upto date.
What has me curious is
why you didn't agree with [paraphrased].
maddog
