(December 30, 2022 at 8:21 am)Authari Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 7:58 am)Anomalocaris Wrote: Science cares about the evidence in support of the idea, it doesn’t care who it is that came up with the idea.

I'm just going to leave this video here for you, he's the Chief Scientist of LP Fusion and he and almost 250 other scientists have signed a petition asserting that The Big Bang Theory is false. (of which he is the person at the helm deconstructing the Big Bang Theory, think of him like the Richard Dawkins of The Big Bang Theory, if the BBT were Religion... which it is.

Administrator Notice
Link removed per 30/30 rule.

Physical cosmologists who have commented on the book have generally dismissed it. In particular, American astrophysicist and cosmologist Edward L. Wright criticized Lerner for making errors of fact and interpretation, arguing that:

• Lerner's alternative model for Hubble's Law is dynamically unstable
  
• the number density of distant radio sources falsifies Lerner's explanation for the cosmic microwave background
  
• Lerner's explanation that the helium abundance is due to stellar nucleosynthesis fails because of the small observed abundance of heavier elements
  

(December 30, 2022 at 9:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 8:21 am)Authari Wrote: I'm just going to leave this video here for you, he's the Chief Scientist of LP Fusion and he and almost 250 other scientists have signed a petition asserting that The Big Bang Theory is false. (of which he is the person at the helm deconstructing the Big Bang Theory, think of him like the Richard Dawkins of The Big Bang Theory, if the BBT were Religion... which it is.

Administrator Notice
Link removed again per 30/30 rules.

Physical cosmologists who have commented on the book have generally dismissed it. In particular, American astrophysicist and cosmologist Edward L. Wright criticized Lerner for making errors of fact and interpretation, arguing that:

• Lerner's alternative model for Hubble's Law is dynamically unstable
  
• the number density of distant radio sources falsifies Lerner's explanation for the cosmic microwave background
  
• Lerner's explanation that the helium abundance is due to stellar nucleosynthesis fails because of the small observed abundance of heavier elements
  

seems to have fooled 250 other scientists then that signed the petition with him. Generally we don't know all that much about the nitty gritty details of the big bang theory but here's what I do know, about the cosmic microwave background radiation, that states that the 'red waves' observed must surely mean the galaxy is 'speeding away from us' but the 'blue waves' observed must surely mean that the galaxies are 'speeding towards us' do you want to know how many galaxies are heading our way?

(copy and pasted) Andromeda is not the only galaxy to be moving towards us. With the help of galaxy surveys, astronomers have found that around 100 galaxies are moving towards us. Compared to the numbers of galaxies that we know of (hundreds of billions), blue-shifted galaxies are seemingly quite rare. Those that are moving towards us are either part of our Local Group, which means that we are gravitationally connected to each other, or they are found in the Virgo Cluster which everything in our Local Group is moving towards.(end paste)

100 galaxies out of the 200 billion estimated galaxies in the known universe. That's it. No other galaxy outside of our local group is moving towards us. Isn't that strange? 199,999,999,900 galaxies surely can't all be heading away from our galaxy. Because we are not the center of the universe from which the Big Bang expanded from. But that's the logic of the Big Bang Theory that asserts indirectly by saying that 'red waves' is everything moving away from us that we are the center of the universe.

Good Old Catholic Dogma.

(December 30, 2022 at 9:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 8:21 am)Authari Wrote: I'm just going to leave this video here for you, he's the Chief Scientist of LP Fusion and he and almost 250 other scientists have signed a petition asserting that The Big Bang Theory is false. (of which he is the person at the helm deconstructing the Big Bang Theory, think of him like the Richard Dawkins of The Big Bang Theory, if the BBT were Religion... which it is.

Physical cosmologists who have commented on the book have generally dismissed it. In particular, American astrophysicist and cosmologist Edward L. Wright criticized Lerner for making errors of fact and interpretation, arguing that:

• Lerner's alternative model for Hubble's Law is dynamically unstable
  
• the number density of distant radio sources falsifies Lerner's explanation for the cosmic microwave background
  
• Lerner's explanation that the helium abundance is due to stellar nucleosynthesis fails because of the small observed abundance of heavier elements
  

Made a response to this that wasn't posted. Strange

Generally we can't fact check things about the Big Bang Theory or other scientific theories because that's just not our specialty, we just take it at Faith that they're telling us the truth. And here's a truth for you out of 200 billion galaxies do you want to know how many galaxies are blue shifted compared to redshifted? 100, those in our local cluster and those in the virgo cluster which we're heading towards.

You don't think its strange at all that the all the other 199,999,999,900 galaxies are heading away from us?

You see The Big Bang Theory is asserting that 

(copy and pasted)red shift

1. the displacement of spectral lines toward longer wavelengths (the red end of the spectrum) in radiation from distant galaxies and celestial objects. This is interpreted as a Doppler shift that is proportional to the velocity of recession and thus to distance.(end paste)
   

that means that every other galaxy not in our local cluster or the virgo cluster is heading away from us, stating quite plainly that we are at the center of the universe. Good old Catholic Dogma.

But you don't see a problem with that model because clearly to think that there should be other galaxies heading towards us out of that astronomical number is just asking to much.

(December 30, 2022 at 10:17 am)Authari Wrote: that means that every other galaxy not in our local cluster or the virgo cluster is heading away from us, stating quite plainly that we are at the center of the universe. Good old Catholic Dogma.

New space-time appears, dynamically, in the interstices of existing space-time.  This creates the illusion that everything is moving away from you.  It happens.  Beings on a galaxy ten billion light-years away also think everything is moving away from them, and they're not even Catholic.

(December 30, 2022 at 10:20 am)LinuxGal Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 10:17 am)Authari Wrote: that means that every other galaxy not in our local cluster or the virgo cluster is heading away from us, stating quite plainly that we are at the center of the universe. Good old Catholic Dogma.

New space-time appears, dynamically, in the interstices of existing space-time.  This creates the illusion that everything is moving away from you.  It happens.  Beings on a galaxy ten billion light-years away also think everything is moving away from them, and they're not even Catholic.

Time doesn't exist.

(December 30, 2022 at 8:21 am)Authari Wrote: I'm just going to leave this video here for you, he's the Chief Scientist of LP Fusion and he and almost 250 other scientists have signed a petition asserting that The Big Bang Theory is false.

What journal accepted this petition for publication?  Or was it just on some guy's blog?

(December 30, 2022 at 10:16 am)Authari Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 9:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote: Physical cosmologists who have commented on the book have generally dismissed it. In particular, American astrophysicist and cosmologist Edward L. Wright criticized Lerner for making errors of fact and interpretation, arguing that:

• Lerner's alternative model for Hubble's Law is dynamically unstable
  
• the number density of distant radio sources falsifies Lerner's explanation for the cosmic microwave background
  
• Lerner's explanation that the helium abundance is due to stellar nucleosynthesis fails because of the small observed abundance of heavier elements
  

Made a response to this that wasn't posted. Strange

Generally we can't fact check things about the Big Bang Theory or other scientific theories because that's just not our specialty, we just take it at Faith that they're telling us the truth. And here's a truth for you out of 200 billion galaxies do you want to know how many galaxies are blue shifted compared to redshifted? 100, those in our local cluster and those in the virgo cluster which we're heading towards.

You don't think its strange at all that the all the other 199,999,999,900 galaxies are heading away from us?

You see The Big Bang Theory is asserting that 

(copy and pasted)red shift

1. the displacement of spectral lines toward longer wavelengths (the red end of the spectrum) in radiation from distant galaxies and celestial objects. This is interpreted as a Doppler shift that is proportional to the velocity of recession and thus to distance.(end paste)
   

that means that every other galaxy not in our local cluster or the virgo cluster is heading away from us, stating quite plainly that we are at the center of the universe. Good old Catholic Dogma.

But you don't see a problem with that model because clearly to think that there should be other galaxies heading towards us out of that astronomical number is just asking to much.

Your posts have been getting caught in the spam catcher.  Reposting immediately, results are the same.  A staff member has to fix it.  Slow your roll stoner boy.

Also, read and follow the rules.  There's a link at the top on the page.

(December 30, 2022 at 10:24 am)arewethereyet Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 10:16 am)Authari Wrote: Made a response to this that wasn't posted. Strange

Generally we can't fact check things about the Big Bang Theory or other scientific theories because that's just not our specialty, we just take it at Faith that they're telling us the truth. And here's a truth for you out of 200 billion galaxies do you want to know how many galaxies are blue shifted compared to redshifted? 100, those in our local cluster and those in the virgo cluster which we're heading towards.

You don't think its strange at all that the all the other 199,999,999,900 galaxies are heading away from us?

You see The Big Bang Theory is asserting that 

(copy and pasted)red shift

1. the displacement of spectral lines toward longer wavelengths (the red end of the spectrum) in radiation from distant galaxies and celestial objects. This is interpreted as a Doppler shift that is proportional to the velocity of recession and thus to distance.(end paste)
   

that means that every other galaxy not in our local cluster or the virgo cluster is heading away from us, stating quite plainly that we are at the center of the universe. Good old Catholic Dogma.

But you don't see a problem with that model because clearly to think that there should be other galaxies heading towards us out of that astronomical number is just asking to much.

Your posts have been getting caught in the spam catcher.  Reposting immediately, results are the same.  A staff member has to fix it.  Slow your roll stoner boy.

Also, read and follow the rules.  There's a link at the top on the page.

I don't know of any rules that I've broken, generally as long as you're being a decent person, you don't have anything to worry about on most forums. However calling someone a 'wonderfuck' right off the bat would definitely be considered flaming. And for no other reason than that they have a different opinion than you. This sort of thing must be common practice here and that rule must be ignored when its Atheists targeting Theists.

Classic 'I hate God so therefore I hate you' atheist mentality.

(December 30, 2022 at 10:16 am)Authari Wrote:

(December 30, 2022 at 9:56 am)Deesse23 Wrote: Physical cosmologists who have commented on the book have generally dismissed it. In particular, American astrophysicist and cosmologist Edward L. Wright criticized Lerner for making errors of fact and interpretation, arguing that:

• Lerner's alternative model for Hubble's Law is dynamically unstable
  
• the number density of distant radio sources falsifies Lerner's explanation for the cosmic microwave background
  
• Lerner's explanation that the helium abundance is due to stellar nucleosynthesis fails because of the small observed abundance of heavier elements
  

Made a response to this that wasn't posted. Strange

There's a spam filter that occasionally grabs posts that aren't spam. The error is usually quickly corrected, but I don't know what the procedure is.

I think I need to call my bookie.