spud100
Moderator
Registered: 12-2017
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
Instead of the Big Bang, it will be known as The Grand Detonation. :-)
|
8/12/2022, 12:12 pm
|
Link to this post
PM spud100
Blog
|
Spikosauropod
Parliamentarian
Registered: 06-2007
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
Or maybe the Ponderous Pop!
|
8/12/2022, 12:31 pm
|
Link to this post
PM Spikosauropod
|
Gr33n Daem0n
Moderator
Registered: 10-2018
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
--- #Not all...
|
8/12/2022, 2:39 pm
|
Link to this post
PM Gr33n Daem0n
Blog
|
Extropia DaSilva
Moderator
Registered: 12-2017
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
So...
The James Webb says the Big Bang did not happen;
What is commonly referred to as the ‘Cosmic Microwave background’ also provides evidence that the Big Bang did not happen;
The relative abundance of light elements also tell us the Big Bang did not happen;
Large-scale structures in the Universe also tell us...you guessed it...the Big Bang did not happen;
A total inability to detect Dark Matter while observing phennomenon that should not exist if there really was Dark Matter also tells us The Big Bang did not happen.
You know, I am starting to see some kind of pattern here....
But, hey, it is not all bad news for the Big Bang. The Redshift data does seem to correspond with an expanding universe (although I think Lerner points to evidence showing this is not the case) and we’ve detected gravitational waves, which are a sign the Big Bang happened.
I watched Lerner’s hour and a half long talk on the James Webb results. I was hoping somebody would comment on the recent supermassive black hole image, which I believe refutes his plasmoid theory. Somebody did, and Lerner’s response was to sit on the fence, saying the maths involved in analysing such images is so tough its early days when it comes to deciphering such an image.
I was also hoping somebody would point ask him to explain how plasma cosmology accounts for gravitational lensing, which seems to me to be the best evidence we have for dark matter. But nobody did.
But, whatever. The evidence against the Big Bang (something like sixteen independent datasets contradict it) is currently sufficient to make the odds of this theory being correct about a billion to one. We can be at least 99 percent sure the theory is BS.
|
8/13/2022, 12:27 am
|
Link to this post
PM Extropia DaSilva
Blog
|
Spikosauropod
Parliamentarian
Registered: 06-2007
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
BS?
Of course, the Bounteous Smash!
|
8/13/2022, 1:59 am
|
Link to this post
PM Spikosauropod
|
spud100
Moderator
Registered: 12-2017
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
Lerner wins again!!
Now how does this change things?
|
8/13/2022, 4:29 pm
|
Link to this post
PM spud100
Blog
|
Extropia DaSilva
Moderator
Registered: 12-2017
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
It probably won’t change things much. If the past is any indication, then the mainstream’s response will be that the contradictory evidence is not real, and is just a case of instrument failure or a misreading of its data. If and when the checks are made and it cannot be denied that the observations are authentic, then the mainstream’s response will be to shoehorn in some ad-hoc new phenomenon that has zero empirical support but conveniently explains away the debunking evidence. After all, what is one more ad-hoc retrodiction to what is already a tottering tower of speculation?
But at least we have seen through this fraud.
|
8/14/2022, 12:45 am
|
Link to this post
PM Extropia DaSilva
Blog
|
Spikosauropod
Parliamentarian
Registered: 06-2007
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
You can't get away from this:
It's not even complex physics.
|
8/14/2022, 10:41 am
|
Link to this post
PM Spikosauropod
|
Extropia DaSilva
Moderator
Registered: 12-2017
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: The Big Bang didn't happen
I have seen long-exposure images of a starry sky which clearly show the stars circling the earth like it is the central point of the whole universe. Judging by such images, you would have to conclude that the geocentric model is correct: Earth is motionless at the centre of the universe, with everything orbiting around it following a circular path.
But, we also now know that while this does seem to agree with the geocentric system, there are also a great many more lines of evidence that are in total DISAGREEMENT with geocentrism, more than enough to warrant dismissing the entire model, in fact.
Similarly, yes the redshift data SEEMS to say the universe is expanding, and that SEEMS to point to an origin in which our universe was once in am ultra-hot and dense state, as the Big Bang says. But, there is so much evidence contradicting the Big Bang that we have to conclude that this theory has no more validity than geocentrism.
Geocentrism managed to cling on long after astronomy had evidence that it is incorrect through suppression of alternative views, and retrodiction. The Big Bang is currently postponing its abandonment through repression of alternative views and retroditction. But those of us dedicated to the truth know what’s going on. The BB hypothesis is BS. You KNOW what that stands for!
|
8/15/2022, 12:23 am
|
Link to this post
PM Extropia DaSilva
Blog
|