"A bolt from the blue" in true TiS style

[Anonymous]

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/c ... ew/253/63/

Whinge whinge whinge from TiS. Baby, cot, pram.

[Roger Stanyard]

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/253/63/

Whinge whinge whinge from TiS. Baby, cot, pram.

Whatever the TiS whinge, NS's report still doesn't support the literal interpretation of the bible, the Noah's flood story or that the world is 6,000 years old.

[ukantic]

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/site/content/view/253/63/

Whinge whinge whinge from TiS. Baby, cot, pram.

As far as I am aware, pocket universes feature of many inflationary models, & are derived from the consideration of the known physical processes that dominated the early universe.

Many Worlds is just one of at least several explanations for the observed behaviour of sub-atomic particles; Boltzmann’s idea concerning thermal fluctuations, examines statistical effects that could come into play given enough time, etc.

These ideas may sound implausible or even bizarre (but that doesn’t necessaryily mean they are wrong), they may involve pie in the sky theorising & conjecture & in some cases there may be little in the way of real experimental proof. However they are all based on consideration of known scientific principles, laws & evidence.

If nothing else, they are all interesting in way that the, “Intelligent Designer did it”, isn’t.

I believe the moon is made of cheese. Us, the great Chedderite race, are the sole survivors of a great cosmic catastrophe that saw our ancestral lunar home of Ched city wiped from the face of the moon by the evil Chedderite hating lunar grey dust tribe.

The Chedderite hating scientists say such ideas are just nonsense, yet it is widely thought by many of their number that the moon dissolves into nothing when no one is looking at. One of their top thinkers, Albert Einstein was even sent to Coventry with a dunce’s hat on for daring to question this dogmatic neo- Copenhagenism

And they think us Chedderites are stupid!

Isn’t it interesting that New Scientist and leading scientific journals can happily publish these experimentally unproven ideas and yet castigate as unscientific those who would maintain that is rational to consider Chedderism as the source of design so apparent in the universe and in nature?

Alan