Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Actually, I Agree

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Sam Patterson on May 26, 2002 21:17:33 UTC

To a small degree. Most of the ICR scientist are very technical, but every once in a while they release something which is a bit streching it. I'll agree that 'the Big Bust' was not all coherent, but it made some good points.

"Uh, the Big Bang theory doesn't explain the lumps in the CMBR" or "Uhhh, we haven't ever seen a star form so we don't know how it happens."

I don't think those are actually quotes, are they?
Some might think the use of quotation marks as a direct quote.

"After reading these articles in depth, I don't think I'll ever take ICR seriously. Don't you understand how terrible that logic is?"

I hope you change your mind on that statement. That one 'Big Bust' I should not have posted, but I did, and I'm sorry. I thought the others were much better though. By the way, how do you explain the huge grouping of galaxies if you believe in the big bang? KC2GWX 73's

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2024 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins