The thing with science is that ALL "what ifs" are considered possible, but ONLY the ones that have enough evidence to back them up are treated as fact. If tomorrow someone came up with ABSOLUTELY IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE that time were indeed somehow speeding up due to the expansion of the universe or something, then after an exhaustive peer-review session science would probably call that fact, and re-evaluate other "facts" based on the new evidence.
Playing the "what if" game is fine and all, but you cannot use it in a debate unless you have something to back it up with. That is the difference between opinion and fact.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks