Stenger\'s Cosmology refuted (Introduction)

by David Turell , Thursday, March 20, 2014, 15:31 (3901 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.