Arrogance of Elitism

By the same token if someone could come up with a rational idea that a BB, originating from a submicroscopic speck, having no place to exist, no time to have existed and no place to expand into, emerged to become, naturally, what the universe is today, could have logically existed, then I might possibly become a BBist and evolutionist, but there would have to be overwhelming evidence. This is a classic example of the hypocrisy of the secularistic arrogant elitist.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

You poor souls -- my heart bleeds for you, in that there are dissenting POVs to yours and that of the majority.You've stated it well: "Everything that possibly can be said already has been said, all to no avail."If the time comes when perhaps you can come up with a new line other than, "we don't know," when it comes to things like where all energy, matter and forces came from relative to the BBT and the LoT which says no energy is created or destroyed, then you might begin making sense to logical folks like Buzsaw. Edited by Buzsaw, : Add apostrophe

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

(Embolding mine for emphasis)Hi Onifre. I have quite high regard for your contributions here at EvC. I have emboldened your signature quote to say that what is considered scientifically blasphemous to today's physicist elitists may end up as truth in some tomorrow future period.When logical arguments such as I have put forth are impugned as total idiocy, having no debatable merit, I consider that as elitist arrogancy.My counterparts in the space sluggout, for example, are falsely maligning me as having no debatable points whatsoever and have not scored even a smidget of a point in the whole 10 page debate. That debate is a dandy example of elitist arrogance, imo. I was gracious enough to admit that my POV was debatable, but no; they can't so much as admit to a thing they said as debatable.They consider their POV as absolutely empirical, all the while failing to empirically refute arguments which I made relative to the properties of space, etc; topics which are debated widely on the www by various science POVs. That, imo, is snobbish elitist arrogancy.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

It appears that you are misreading me. If you read carefully, hopefully you will see that I was saying that what physicist elitists consider as scientifically blasphemous i.e. not scientific, may be found to be truth in the future.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

PaulK, my understanding of things is radical IYO. Your arrogancy is that you think the majority POV must not be rigorously debated unless it makes sense to you. Well, your POV doesn't make sense to me. Just because one rigorously debates another view than yours and debates intensively on a minority POV, the one is considered by you as arrogant.You've debated in a condescending arrogant manner towards me for years, so that's what I expect from you. You're not a pleasant member to dialog and debate with but you're around about 24/7 so it becomes necessary.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.