Re: Big Bang: How widely accepted?

Bruce Scott TOK (
12 Sep 1995 10:06:21 GMT

Robert Roosen ( wrote:

: Someone wrote
: : : You might try to read outside astronomy a little. Hannes Alfvens work in
: : : Plasma Physics has done some real damage to Big Bang. The BB theory is NOT
: : : almost universally accepted. There are some steady staters left and a whole
: : : new crop of plasma cosmology theorists. Try Lerners "The Big Bang Never
: : : Happened " as a start. He gives an excellent descripton of teh alternates
: : : and the problems in publishing challenges to big bang.

: Check the URLs on the debunkers. The majority of them are being paid by
: branches of the Military/Industrial Complex. They are blind to truth
: because of this. In the US this phenomenon is called "conflict of interest".
: In 1972 I testified against letting the Atomic Energy Commission
: set all the rules for handling radioactive materials in the State of New
: Mexico. Of 150 people in the room, only two of us had paid our own way
: to come. The rest worked for the AEC and its contractors. We got the
: same sort of flak then. The employees of the system really did believe
: they were thinking for themselves, when in fact they had "Stockholm
: Syndrome" written all over them.
: btw, the key is the lack of humor they show while "defending"
: something they do not understand.

Ad Hominem is an elementary fallacy of logic, Roosen. Your information
about the AEC in 1972 is irrelevant to anything going on here.

Another logical fallacy you perform is to assume that if there is a
special circumstance (conflict of interest) in one case then there must
be in the next case.

Humor, you say? When have you shown anything but bitterness?

Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott The deadliest bullshit is
Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik odorless and transparent -- W Gibson