Ya know, any other theory in science would have been shot and put out of it's misery by now after failing so many crucial and important so called "tests" of the model. The whole concept of galaxy evolution is the most important so called "prediction" of the expansion model, and yet every single time we get a new observation from further back in time, it shows massive and mature galaxies as far as we can see. There is zero evidence of a bang, none. It's all fabricated nonsense. The expansion dogma simply doesn't jive with the observations. Source: thunderbolts.info forum.
4
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
3 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I would much rather shoot down political theories like "Boris is a good PM" And "First past the post is a good electoral system", because the resolution of them is holding us back right now.
Of course I would replace politics with group of prophet like investigation by elected scientists for establishing much better governance
Mcflewster
Level 8
May 5, 2021
0
A theory like “Boris is a good PM” requires answers to “Good for whom?”
@yvilletom That's why I look at and give some credence to polls. They are not predictions tho, as you know, and that makes politics harder to talk in terms of theory.
Contrary to what you contend , it was Hubble who first showed that the universe is expanding.
If all the astrophysicists on the planet are wrong then present your mathematical refutation.
waitingforgodo
Level 8
May 3, 2021
0
Here’s what Edwin Hubble said about expansion:
“. . . the expanding models are definitely inconsistent with the observations that have been made . . . expanding models are a forced interpretation of the observational results. — E. Hubble, Ap. J., 84, 517, 1936
If a metaphor doesn’t offend you, Georges LeMaitre and other mathematicians stole the universe from physicists. LeMaitre used math to support the Church’s Genesis story. America’s fundamentalists, wanting the origin story Darwin had taken from them, swallowed what LeMaitre gave them.
hmmm...so no evidence of god plays out as a "no way" conclusion, but no evidence of a bang plays as "what else you got?" perhaps the unverse is just a simmer up universe. a bleed thru from some dimension folded into the fabric of spacetime?
I don’t know, but here’s what Edwin Hubble said about expansion:
“. . . the expanding models are definitely inconsistent with the observations that have been made . . . expanding models are a forced interpretation of the observational results. — E. Hubble, Ap. J., 84, 517, 1936
And here’s what Hubble said about an origin:
“...a universe extended indefinitely in both space and time.“
— E. Hubble, 1937 Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices.
Word:
Yeah, what he said. Universe has always been.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.