A Common Sense Interpretation Of The Facts

On Scientific Grounds This Big Bang Assumption Is Much Less The Palatable Of The Two. For It Is An Irrational Process That Cannot Be Described In Scientific Terms. . . . On Philosophical Grounds Too I Cannot See Any Good Reason For Preferring The Big Bang Idea. Indeed It Seems To Me In The Philosophical Sense To Be A Distinctly Unsatisfactory Notion, Since It Puts The Basic Assumption Out Of Sight Where It Can Never Be Challenged By A Direct Appeal To Observation.

The Main Efforts Of Investigators Have Been In Papering Over Contradictions In The Big Bang Theory, To Build Up An Idea Which Has Become Ever More Complex And Cumbersome.

In The Popular Mind, If Hoyle Is Remembered It Is As The Prime Mover Of The Discredited Steady State Theory Of The Universe. "everybody Knows" That The Rival Big Bang Theory Won The Battle Of The Cosmologies, But Few (not Even Astronomers) Appreciate That The Mathematical Formalism Of The Now-favoured Version Of Big Bang, Called Inflation, Is Identical To Hoyle's Version Of The Steady State Model.

Things Are The Way They Are Because They Were The Way They Were.

Religion Is But A Desperate Attempt To Find An Escape From The Truly Dreadful Situation In Which We Find Ourselves. Here We Are In This Wholly Fantastic Universe With Scarcely A Clue As To Whether Our Existence Has Any Real Significance. No Wonder Then That Many People Feel The Need For Some Belief That Gives Them A Sense Of Security, And No Wonder That They Become Very Angry With People Like Me Who Say That This Is Illusory.