There are many who declare that Truth is manifold. They are speaking not of Truth, but of opinion. It is like saying there are many perspectives on a single thing. But that does not alter the nature of the single thing. Just because one blind man says with absolute conviction that the elephant has a body like a tree trunk, another will say it has the shape of a snake. These are only, at best, partial descriptions.
But nonetheless we can consider the effects of the proposed approach.
Let us consider what we are told about the CERN accelerator. We are told it is to spilt sub-atomic particles and to create those forms that were present an instant after the initial ‘Big Bang’ that brought the Universe into existence. Such is the modern interpretation of creation.
Let us suppose, along with the scientists, that such an event is what actually occurred. What would be the likely outcome of re-creating that event on Earth? Would it not be surely to tear a hole in the universe and destroy not only the planet but the solar system, and the neighbouring star cluster to which the solar system belongs?
That is the first question that arises with regard to such a rash act.
The second one is how, if these particles existed only for an instant following the big bang, or whatever other expression is currently used, are the scientists aware that these particles they are seeking to reproduce ever existed? They were not present at the cataclysmic event to observe these things and yet they purport to tell us that these things occurred. This means that any such predictions or claims that are made are speculations. Opinions, and nothing more.
By sheer observation we notice that with the acceleration of the CERN accelerator, earthquakes are caused in Nepal. We hear from Inuit elders that the Sun is now setting in a different place to former years. This can only have occurred within their lifetimes for them to be able to observe such a thing. We are forced to conclude that the scientists are not being honest with us and that the accelerator is actually to explore something other than what they declare its use is.
Given that can we rely on anything they tell us?
