Stenger\'s Cosmology refuted (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, March 20, 2014, 15:31 (4497 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George: Stenger has responded to Barnes and Barnes has responded to Stenger: > > http://letterstonature.wordpress.com/2012/05/02/in-defence-of-the-fine-tuning-of-the-un... wish I could folow their arguments better. > > George: It seems to me that Stenger takes a broad-brush approach > but Barnes wants all the i's dotted and tees crossed. -Fair enough. > > George; Barnes' metaphysical objections to the universe coming from nothing > implying that what Stenger calls nothing is not really nothing > works the other way round. It is the philosophical concept > of nothing that can't really exist.-There are philosophers who state that Stenger's something-from-nothing is wrong. I've quoted this in my book and drag in criticisms of Krauss' same approach from other commentators. You are implying that there has always been something. I don't argue with that. > > George: Barnes is too well versed in the theories, > he finds it difficult to think outside his specialism.-He is with the crowd of cosmology folks who buy fine tuning. Stenger is the outlier.