Re 178
Bruggen 130

I’ve never ever told you that you are wrong in your convictions. How would I know? I haven’t a clue ! You could be right and the Cosmos is made of green cheese. Don’t please tell me you never said that – I know you didn’t. All I’ve ever written is an admonition not to regurgitate other ideas – think for yourself. Your conclusions – or mine – are as good and as valid as any when considering the origins of the Universe; where has it come from, where is it going, what is its purpose ? As far as we know, no one knows the answers to these questions and perhaps, never will.

Re 179
Bruggen, after that ‘knife in the ribs’ via Fred Hoyle and Charliehunt – I did laugh – I should switch of the light and tiptoe quietly from the room, closing the door firmly.

It’s simple even for you, I’m right and your so wrong that you don’t even know it:stupid:

[QUOTE=charliehunt;2103102]It took me a while to understand your last few words, but I very much appreciate you keeping an eye on my posts. As debated a few weeks ago in another thread, I never know nor care how many I or anyone has.:rolleyes: I did read about him many years ago and have a great respect for him. What is the “noble prize”, by the way….?[/QUOTE

You that thick you have to ask, can’t work out a spelling mistak:very_drunk: it don’t matter because he didn’t win it anyway.

No need to patronise me Bruggen and my education was well formed without your intervention.
Fred Hoyle was a family friend so I don’t need a lesson in his career. Since he rejected the theory you are so wedded to I wondered why you included him in your list above. The more you post the sillier you appear.

Well you should at least read about him, just because he rejected it does not mean he was right, he made a massive contribution to understanding the big bang, trying to appear clever by association:stupid: and you have front to call silly. he should have received a noble prize but didn’t because he was a gobby mouthed Yorkshireman, a lot like people who talk a lot but say very little. 5,661 and counting.:eagerness:

RE 174

Apart from the Hubble, they all discuss propositions. There might be proof of these propositions somewhere but, at present, that proof is unobtainable.

Bruggen, I think that you have the best of intentions but, you are misled. Try less reading. Find a quiet corner and do some thinking. You might yourself, come up with one or two good ideas about the nature and purpose of the Universe.

Try less reading, if I did that I would be as daft as you, so no thanks. All I’ve had off you is you telling me I’m wrong, but not why I’m wrong, for the simple reason you don’t know what I’m talking about and you never will in a million years. So don’t tell I’m misled, because I’m amazed at your lack of knowledge, you can’t even bluff your way through a conversation. I know I’m right about this, you on the other hand don’t know anything. well apart from what cordite smells like.

The very same Fred Hoyle who rejected the Big Bang in favour of Steady State but correct me if I am wrong.

Yes and who was also proved wrong, now I’m going to educate you Charles, Fred was a genius who did indeed favour the steady state model and was the Big Bangs biggest critic, if you had gone a little deeper than just grasping at the first thing that you think proves a point, you would have found out that it was actually Fred who coined the phrase the Big Bang in a radio broadcast in 1950, he was using it in a derisory tone but here’s the thing it caught on world wide, how ironic is that. but after the steady state model was thrown out he went on to find out how the heavy elements were formed, the elements like iron, carbon, the things that you are made of were formed in the exploding supernovas that seeded the early universe with all the heavy elements.

Re 167

My thought, is that you have ‘brainwashed’ yourself. I think that you are genuinely convinced of the truth of your regurgitations. I can get quite excited about endless speculation and I would guess that somewhere about 98% of what is under discussion about the Cosmos is just that.

I can’t give you any evidence because there is none or, very little. As I’ve commented previously, I’m certain only about the uncertainty.

The only person that’s uncertain is you with such a weak answer, the reason you can’t give me evidence is because you refuse to look, which if you did you would see that what you think you know about it is very little,
I’m Quoting you the writings of Einstein , Hawking. Hubble, oh and a certain Yorkshire man by the name of Fred Hoyle. ( that should get the Yorkies to look) are you so backward in your thinking that you think those men
where talking b%llock . all you keep saying “we don’t know” well we do know, it’s just you that does not because your to lazy to put a bit of effort in to finding out.

Would your Father not have hoped that one day all his most treasured belongings went to his Daughter? it’s just a thought because it’s the first thing that I had in mind, after saying that this place is second to none for the advice you seek.
Phil.

Re 162

I like that. Is that another of your ‘facts’ ?

I thought you might, can I ask you if you think I’m making this up as I go along? and what are your thoughts on the subject and what evidence can you give to support It?