9-6-06 Big Bang Brushoff
It isn't so much that I have a problem with this idea, ...the one about how the universe suddenly burst into existence out of nowhere... no, it's not so much that it's too close to the "let there be light" story. That isn't really what I don't like about it at all. What I don't like about it is that it's handed to the public as official dogma.
"Perhaps never in the history of science has so much quality evidence accumulated against a model so widely accepted within a field. Even the most basic elements of the theory, the expansion of the universe and the fireball remnant radiation, remain interpretations with credible alternative explanations. One must wonder why, in this circumstance, that four good alternative models are not even being comparatively discussed by most astronomers."
That quote is from this webpage...
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp
The quote is down near the bottom of the page, just before the acknowledgements and references. The page's title is "The Top 30 Problems With the Big Bang". And although it looks like there are only 10 listed, a bit more reading will show the additional 20.
The problem with the hypothesis of the Big Bang isn't that it doesn't fulfil the necessary requirement for a scientific hypothesis to be "disprovable", it's the clear fact that it continues to be disproved, year after year.
When is this tired old dogma going to be put to bed?
It was only yesterday that this article showed up...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060905104549.htm
...assailing yet another aspect of the Big Bang dogma. One hardly needs to spend years of study for advanced degrees in astronomy to notice how far out on a limb the pro-Big Bang camp goes, lately. It's getting to be like a church of the holy doctrine, screaming loudly, "The universe is finite! It burst forth out of nothing! Dark matter! Dark matter!" What're these guys afraid of?
Oh well, I suppose that if I spent my entire life laboring to defend the wrong theory, I'd be afraid, too. It's about the grant money, stupid!
"Perhaps never in the history of science has so much quality evidence accumulated against a model so widely accepted within a field. Even the most basic elements of the theory, the expansion of the universe and the fireball remnant radiation, remain interpretations with credible alternative explanations. One must wonder why, in this circumstance, that four good alternative models are not even being comparatively discussed by most astronomers."
That quote is from this webpage...
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp
The quote is down near the bottom of the page, just before the acknowledgements and references. The page's title is "The Top 30 Problems With the Big Bang". And although it looks like there are only 10 listed, a bit more reading will show the additional 20.
The problem with the hypothesis of the Big Bang isn't that it doesn't fulfil the necessary requirement for a scientific hypothesis to be "disprovable", it's the clear fact that it continues to be disproved, year after year.
When is this tired old dogma going to be put to bed?
It was only yesterday that this article showed up...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/09/060905104549.htm
...assailing yet another aspect of the Big Bang dogma. One hardly needs to spend years of study for advanced degrees in astronomy to notice how far out on a limb the pro-Big Bang camp goes, lately. It's getting to be like a church of the holy doctrine, screaming loudly, "The universe is finite! It burst forth out of nothing! Dark matter! Dark matter!" What're these guys afraid of?
Oh well, I suppose that if I spent my entire life laboring to defend the wrong theory, I'd be afraid, too. It's about the grant money, stupid!
posted by Jeff Barnard at 8:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home