Who Needs Ancenstrality?

Since I am not yet able to blog while I sleep, I’m getting to these just now. Levi:

I take it that the point about ancestrality is that here we have an example of an event where correlation was not operative, yet which is nonetheless true and intelligible.

Here’s an example of an event where correlation is not operation (thought/being) – 2+2=4. I don’t need anything outside of my thought to come with it and know that it is both true and intelligible. What do I do now?

Just because Big Bang took place before humans were there does not mean we cannot know that it took place – however, we know about it not through an empirical observation but throw a series of theoretical conclusions, the way scientists know about all sorts of things. So what if it took place when humans were not around? A lot of things take place when humans are not around, the fact that we, humans, are now talking about it is what makes the difference. Explain to me how 2+2=4 is true and intelligible without a correlation and presents us with no problems yet somehow Big Bang or a fossil suddently blow everything out of the water and I will die a happy camper.