Author: KarinsDad
Date: 11:43:33 11/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 1999 at 09:10:56, Dan Homan wrote: [snip] > >This is very frusterating to those of us working in astrophysics, because >not only is the public badly informed by this kind of reporting, but they >are also (incorrectly) given the impression that well established theories >are constantly being overthrown by new discoveries. If you want some >decent information about the state of the Big Bang theory and the >evidence (both for and against), read a book by a well respected >scientist... for example, Joseph Silk's "The Big Bang" is excellent, >although it won't have some of the very newest stuff (depending on when >the last revision was). > > - Dan Dan, Thanks for the reference. I will read it as soon as I find it. I appreciate it when someone takes the time to not only correct me (although I would greatly appreciate it if you could tell me where I was wrong in my previous post in an Email), but to give evidence that both supports and denies my opinions (as the book you mentioned should). I do not claim that the Big Bang never happened or that Dark Matter doesn't exist. I do claim that the information given to the public is suspect, most likely flawed, and often contradictory; and that is why I do not support those theories. But then again, I see these same type of problems in several other scientific fields such as archeology for example, so don't take it personally. Thanks again. KarinsDad :)
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.