And I thought the Big Bang Theory only had 2 reasons going for it.
There will be champagne corks popping today.
What it means is that Space-Time CAN be manipulated................................
Scientists still suffer from Ptolemaic influences, no matter how far out their sphere of reference goes.
We’re born: I’m the center of the universe!
We’re a kid: I’m the center of the neighborhood!
We’re a schoolboy: I’m the center of the class!
We’re in college: I’m the center of my girlfriend’s world!
We’re a scientist: I’m the center of the universe!
“Dr. Kovac said the chance that the results were a fluke was only one in 3.5 million — a gold standard of discovery called five-sigma.”
Anyone know if this scientific “gold standard” is applied also to the results thus far in proving the theories of evolution and anthropogenic global warming? ( so-called “settled science”)
Theroasly...Can there be a Big Bang if there is no ear to hear it?
God works in the most mysterious, yet simplest ways.
“Hugh and Series! “
Naw! Mute and irrevalunt! A looser!
So, this a big deal?
Bazinga!!!!
Doesn’t prove the “big bang.” The “big bang” is not a sufficient explanation for the origin of the universe.
So the universe is less than a second old, and it gets “wrenched apart”? Mighty big wrench.
Big bang is a bunch of bullshit just like evolution, I don’t care what these fools think they’ve found. Having all the mass of the universe collapsed to a point would be the mother of all black holes, and nothing would ever “Bang(TM)” its way out of that. These clowns are doubling-down on stupid, just like the libtards and demokkkrats are.
And I thought the Big Bang Theory only had 2 reasons going for it.
Didn't know there was an observatory at the South Pole. Are they sure they weren't just measuring their teeth chattering?
Or it could have just been the wake of a starship warp drive.
Anyone yet have a line on any peer reviewable paper?
I’ve poked around. Can’t find one yet.
Calling President Bush!
Bookmark for later.