REFERENCES
*** g96 1/22 p. 4 What the Big Bang Explains-What It Doesn't ***
Professor Fred Hoyle likened the efforts of the Ptolemaic cosmologists at patching up their failing theory in
the face of new discoveries to the endeavors of big bang believers today to keep their theory afloat. He wrote in
his book The Intelligent Universe: "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." After referring to
Ptolemy's futile use of epicycles to rescue his theory,Hoyle continued: "I have little hesitation in saying that as a result a
sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory. As I have mentioned earlier, when a pattern of facts becomes set
against a theory, experience shows that it rarely recovers."-Page 186
<*** g96 1/22 p. 5-11 What the Big Bang Explains-What It Doesn't ***
"We Are Missing Some Fundamental Element"
Geller's three-dimensional maps of thousands of clumped, tangled, and bubbled galactic agglomerations have
transformed the way scientists picture the universe. She does not pretend to understand what she sees.
Gravity alone appears unable to account for her great wall. "I often feel we are missing some fundamental element in
our attempts to understand this structure," she admits.
Geller enlarged on her misgivings: "We clearly do not know how to make large structure in the context of the Big Bang.e
" Interpretations of cosmic structure on the basis of current mapping of the heavens are far from definitive-more like trying
to picture the whole world from a survey of Rhode Island, U.S.A. Geller continued: "Someday we may find that we haven't been
putting the pieces together in the right way, and when we do, it will seem so obvious that we'll wonder why
we hadn't thought of it much soon
| 
