From: jgacker@news.gsfc.nasa.gov (James G. Acker)
Subject: Re: Observations
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 13:47:48 GMT

Bruce Salem (salem@pangea.Stanford.EDU) wrote:
: >	The same way you distinguish between the spontaneous creation
: >of the Universe (the "Big Bang") and "God did it".
: >	You can't.  That's where faith comes in.
: 
: 	Wrong! The Big Bang has results that can be tested for,
: and possibly not found. In case you are still wet behind the ears,
: there was an alternative theory, the Steady State Theory of Hoyle,
: et. al., which has not found the same kind of emperical confirmation
: as the Big Bang. So, it is not a matter of faith, nor do arguments
: for and against make the issue moot, as there are tests. Seems to me
: that between your obvious religious leanings and the rest of your
: background, which I can guess at, that you don't have the slightest
	
	Don't guess.  ASK!  Because you are _dead_ wrong.

: inkling about what is science and what is not. I am not saying here,
: that anyone has absolute proof for a Big Bang, but neither do you
: have even as much demonstation for a Supernatural Creation, ONLY
	Did I say that I had evidence for a Supernatural Creation?  No.
Read it again, and again, and again, and again, until you get it.  IF
THERE WAS EVIDENCE FOR A SUPERNATURAL CREATION, THE NEED FOR FAITH WOULD
BE OBVIATED.  GOD WOULD BE PROVEN.  Do you UNDERSTAND?  I am
gasping for air, I am so angry.

: your faith, which may well be founded on personal need ONLY.
: 
	You apparently have a personal need to cut some teeth.

	I am seething, Brucie.  I have a Ph.D. in chemical oceanography,
and I knew about Hoyle's steady state theory of the Universe when I was
seven years old, because my Dad taught me about it.   He introduced me
to the Big Bang vs. Steady State right about the time of the discovery
of the 3 degrees Kelvin background.
	Let me try to explain.  (Several calming breaths)

	AS of this moment,  Science cannot ascribe a cause to the Big
Bang.  It is the personal choice of the individual to say, (1) that the Big
Bang was a natural consequence of quantum string theory, fluctuations
in the cosmic aether, or bubbles in nothingness.  Alan Guth described a theory
by which we could create other universes
by creating a singularity.  This would test the possibility of creating a
universe.  It wasn't actually very practical at this time because it required
a hellacious energy source, but it was theoretically possible.
	The individual can also say (2) that because there is no
given cause for the Big Bang, it is actually possible that a supernatural
entity caused it.  WOW!  I've just been hit by a revelation!  Due to
his incredible natural superiority and jumping to conclusive tendencies,
Bruce Salem created the Universe in the Big Bang!  I now worship the ground
you walk on, Bruce.  :-))))))))
	As of this moment, there is no way to ascribe a cause to the 
Big Bang.  It could be natural, or it could be a supernatural intervention.
The Big Bang Happened.  There is evidence for it.  Shall we discuss the
Cosmic Background Radiation?  The COBE results?  Guth's original inflation
theory or the modified inflation scenario?  Do you want me to go back
and review Hoyle's Steady-State Theory?  I'm not quite up on my Hawking,
give me a few weeks.

	I can go toe-to-toe with you on an understanding of science and
I just ripped Visionary Lionel because he doesn't understand it.  My 
faith in God will not one whit influence my understanding, leanings or
practice of good, solid science.  You got that?  Can you read?
	I believe in the Big Bang.  I also believe in God.  There is
a lot of evidence for the Big Bang.  The only evidence I have for the
existence of God is what is written in the Bible.  I don't believe in
a literal interpretation of the Bible, and if one person claimed to have
incontrovertible evidence for the existence of God, I'd consider him an
utter crackpot, on a par with those who claim Elvis is alive.
	Because I apparently understand the meaning and implications of
faith one heck of a lot better than you do.
	
	I respectfully request an apology for your questioning of my
scientific background, scientific credentials, and understanding of the
scientific method.

	Jim Acker
	jgacker@neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov