> WMAP Public Web Site Email
>
> From: Kurt Hanson <kurt_hanson@me.com>
> Subject: Regarding the origin of the initial force/energy of the Big Bang
>
> Howdy Messrs. Bennett, Griswold, Hinshaw, and Spergel,
>
> I want to use the Big Bang theory as the foot in the door to a series of propositions that conclude with the proclamation for the existence of a Creative entity.
>
> I state a premise that things either exist or they do not. The question is: the force/energy (f/e) of the universe at the moment of the Big Bang came from where? The f/e either came from something that exists or something that does not exist. I know that something that does not exist could not have brought the f/e into existence, and so I must conclude that some "thing" is the origin of the f/e of the universe. A simple deduction that I have yet to find a constructive refutation towards. Defining this "thing" is another subject. Acknowledging that whatever It is exists is profound if no refutation can be found to the contrary.
>
> Whether the universe ultimately contracts, slows, or accelerates is irrelevant towards a determination of the origin of the initial f/e of the Big Bang. Because the absurdity of the statement, "The f/e of the universe originated from something not in existence," cannot be valid, what statement could be given to refute the concluding statement, "The f/e of the universe was caused by some "thing" already in existence."
>
> No one could claim that they don't literally know or have knowledge of what caused the f/e of the universe. Some "thing" had to have caused the f/e because a non-entity or something that does not exist could not have been responsible for the origin of the f/e.
>
> Given the set of logical statements leading to the conclusion of the existence of a Creative entity, I have my foot in the door which allows future others to begin thought and rational statements defining this "thing," and to further advance cosmogony and the Big Bang theory. I would be thrilled to advance the claim of a Creative entity with a set of modern empirical facts and information. To use the Big Bang theory as a foot in the door to do so is my intention.
>
> Any constructive criticism of my premise and conclusion if offered is welcomed.
>
KLH
New York
From:
Paul Butterworth <pbutterw@milkyway.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Subject:
Re: WMAP Public Web Site Email - Regarding the origin of the initial force/energy of the Big Bang
Date:
June 16, 2009 02:02:01 PM EDT
To:
Kurt Hanson
Hi Kurt,
I think you are reaching for what is called the 'first cause' argument,
which has been around for a very long time - but has no explanatory power.
If the universe requires a creator, because 'nothing can come of
nothing' then that creator requires a creator too. You are stuck with a
pointless infinite regression. Many scientists have discussed whether
there are any scientific data that support religious tendencies. The
usual conclusion is negative. "Science and Religion" (Prometheus Books,
2003) is a nice collection of relevant essays. Another fine example
dealing with cosmology and religion is "Why (Almost All) Cosmologists are
Atheists" by Sean Carroll (available at
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/sean_carroll/cosmologists.html)
Some scientists are religious, but their various religious beliefs are not
supported by scientific data.
Best wishes,
Paul Butterworth
for the WMAP website team
18 comments:
I will have to put the statements into a series of logical AND, OR terms. The mathematical logic of a series of statements and the ensuing conclusion presented and submitted as a paper in a scholarly journal cannot be ignored by the academic elite. Either the concluding statement for the existence of a Creative entity is valid and a universal truth, or one should submit a constructive rebuttal refuting the premise and or conclusion.
Like pulling teeth without novacaine ... .
...,
What they were trying to say in the politest possible way is that you're full of crap. =)
lol pwned
Boys and girls, these two posters collaborate with others in their community who rape kids in homes, schools, and orphanages. They supply the chemicals and drugs for others to sprinkle on some kid's food, hoping the hapless young lad will start thinking like a girl entering puberty. Day after day they lace the kid's food with these girly chemicals, and they watch and wait for the kid to start acting "strange." When the kid starts acting strange these Maggots of Jesus i.e., Maggie and that goofball posting with her, these two will now will have older people who practice faggotism trying to befriend the kid. Maggie and her friend rape kids and when one of these victims of rape discover these maggots and what they're doing, like the Virginia Tech shooter found out, Maggie and her rectal friends belittle the person. Even after the Virginia Tech incident the maggots say the guy was crazy but the maggots who set him up to committhose acts are the sweet, nice people like that puke maggot of Jesus, Maggie.
Maggie the Maggot of Jesus has friends in law enforcement that'll protect her and her comrades satanic acts. The relatives of victims from these maggots
acts should someday know the truth. Miley Dreams, Miley Cyrus and I are just the ticket Jesus bought for this task of ridding the earth of faggotism, and the maggot mentality that feeds it.
pwn your rectum, anus.
Oops, I think we hurt his feelings.
Cool wall of text, bro.
In the topic: BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
I love how you can like, pour your heart out to NASA, show them the sum of your life's work... and they'll just shoot you down, no hesitation.
That takes balls. Though not in this case as Mergatroidal is a raging crybaby.
Sezzle, this isn't like you, usually you're so polite.
I'm not above laughing at other people's failings, Mag'.
But come on, posting the emails on to a blog and then 'baww'ing about it? (as you so eloquently put it!)
He practically invited us. Some people have no sense.
Anyway, what are these so called 'girly' chemicals?
They're a figment of his schizophrenic imagination, er... "Sez".
Oh ok, that's what I thought. 'Cause I was playing with barbie dolls YONKS before I even knew what gay WAS. My mother was like WTF GO PLAY WITH YOUR NEW CAR so I drew flowers and other girly shit all over it. Barbie had the most pimpin' ride ever!
Ahaha, I take it you had a sister? Your mother doesn't seem like the type to supply you with dolls.
I used to steal my cousin's action man dolls and pretend to do 'weddings' to piss him off. In actual fact I'd just have them doing waterskiing or whatever the hell it is action men do and just go "YOU MAY NOW KISS THE BRIDE" when he came in.
Gender-based toys is a bunch of crap anyway, it's just tradition.
There are little girls that come into the church who want to be astronauts and firewomen, and boys who want to be tap dancers. their parents are all "OMG NO YOU HAVE TO DO BOY THINGS LIKE FOOTBALL". This sucks, cause some of these kids are pretty talented. Reminds me of Billy Elliot =D
Tell it how it is, sista. Yeah, I have two sisters and an older brother. Incidentally, he used to do Irish dancing! I'm not even lying, that's what he did, and he was damn good at it.
I personally think male dancers are manly as hell. They have amazing legs and they're really strong. And they can jump all over the place and not get tired. Man, I wish I could do that stuff. The only thing I'm really good at is sculpting, but who even does that for a living these days? =P
I'm getting pretty good at male nudes, if you get what I mean. ;)
Ooh, saucy!
Sculpting is an art form. Artists are traditionally dirt-poor, but look at Andy Warhol. Have you heard of him? He was extremely successful in his time.
Did I ever?!?!?! He's like my big gay idol!
I have a question for you, Maggiedoll, most girls don't care about my flambouyantness...ess? is that even a word? Oh well who cares.
Are you a fag hag? Like no offence, I know a few and they're all really lovely girls, but you're like the most liberal christian I've ever met. Especially on the interbuttz. Usually they're all fake and "OMG UR A HOMO EW PENISES ARE EVIL".
BY THE WAY.
"pwn your rectum, anus."
Sorry Mergy, baby, I'd love to, but I prefer real men. The kind with cocks. Yeah, I don't think it would work out between us. Also, I like my guys to be younger than 40 so they don't have trouble keeping it up. It's nothing personal.
"Fag Hag"?!?!?! I had to look that one up. I didn't even know there was a word for that.
No, I'm not a 'fag hag'. I'm actually the vice-chairman of a local womens' rights movement and I work with kids who are having a tough time at home (like if their parents are breaking up or something). I only started on with the equal rights for gays thing recently. Before that I just ignored all the bigotism that goes on.
I'm hoping to set up a shelter for stray cats and dogs too, but that's a low priority on my list, as now I soom will have a family to raise.
So I think the proper term for someone like me is a 'busybody'. =P
A VERY busy body, by the sounds of things. =P Nah, that's good. You've got one lucky kid, to have a mom who will stand up for his right to choose how he wants to live, whatever he chooses.
Unless they want to be a scientologist or worship the flying spaghetti monster. Then I'd have to put my foot down.
I don't really see the point in restricting things like religion and lifestyle. If they want to join you, they will. If they want to break out, they will. Why make it harder?
I'd be strict where it counts though. No peircings until they're 16! No wild drunken parties under my roof!
Got about 16 years to psyche myself up for that, though =P
Post a Comment