Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Neocon's Seminar Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (600)	5/13/2001 6:46:31 PM
From: Mitch Blevins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1112

You've said alot here, and I agree with much of it. But I'd like to address one point... I find it ironic that you are so firm in your conviction there was no Big Bang. I have no such conviction. I've said that I don't believe in the Big Bang, mostly because I am too dense to grasp most of the math involved. I certainly leave it open as a possibility, and would not be disheartened if further understanding on my part caused me to come down on one side or another about the Big Bang. I recognize that most physicists find the weight of evidence for the Big Bang substantial, at least going back to a tiny-tiny-fraction of a second after t=0. And on big numbers, the odds are 10^9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 etc. that there is not a perfect number that is odd. I believe there isn't, but using your logic, you believe there is! If the odds are 10^999...999 that the universe just sprang into existence as it is, then the odds are 10^(10^999...999) that an intelligence capable of creating it just sprang into existence.