Re: Big Bang: How widely accepted?

Carl J Lydick (carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU)
5 Sep 1995 17:36:44 GMT

In article <>, (Robert Roosen) writes:
=Erik Max Francis ( wrote:
=: Dan Hughes <> writes:
=: > The big bang is only the most popular view of the origin of the
=: > universe.
=: It is also presently the most successful at explaining observations.
= This is due to the limiting assumptions that the high energy
=physicists use when they promote their own world view as a "universal" one.
= In fact, Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis is a much more popular view
=of the origin of life and is a far more satisfactory basis for a globally
=acceptable cosmology.

Lovelock's Gaia hypothesis says absolutely nothing about the origin of life.
Some folks who can't be troubled to read the actual work, however, tend to
claim that it does. But why should we expect Roosen to break his perfect
record and know what he's talking about in this case?

Disclaimer: Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS. That's what I get paid for. My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below). So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it. If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.