Debunking of Modern Evolutionary and Cosmological Theories

[Alex K]

It seems as though this is a desperate attempt to deny their utter uncertainty of how our universe started.  As they discover more and more, they have a harder time conceptualizing their preexisting theories.  To hold such a theory, which is certainly immeasurable (because it is out of this universe), requires an equal amount of faith as theism because there is no way to build up on it, or even prove.  Are we just supposed to blindly believe this?  If they believe this, among all things, how can we trust any alternate theory they propose?  It’s doubtful this will be the final consensus, though it truly unmasks their uncertainty and their capability to pull their evidence from unobservable data.
(Note that this is not a belief held by a small group of scientists; it is accepted by the finest of physicists today.  Professors from University of Columbia, University of California, Tufts University, and the University of Cambridge are just a few among the many who do–even the well known, Stephen Hawking.)

On the whole, I'd say it's a well written essay, with the exception of the above paragraph, which is atrocious and seems more like cheerleading for your own view than anything substantive.

I have two main criticism.  First and foremost, you try to cover way too much ground for a single essay.  Pick one or two examples and work them.  You're likely to end with as many fallacies, but since this is English and not logic, that's not important.  People in general will only take away three main points from an essay.  You have one main point, but it's buried in about 6 examples.  Way too much for anybody's attention span.  

Second, avoid extraneous adjectives like 'desperate' and 'truly' -- let the facts do your describing for you.  Throwing in adjectives that way raises a person's suspicions; they're too used to people trying to sell them 'new' and 'improved' soap ten times a day as it is.  It just raises red flags in your reader.

Other than that, good job.  Is this college level material?  Seems a bit advanced for high school.

Are you high? In what universe is the second paragraph acceptable? 

First of all, it must be made clear that the modern scientific community is corrupt.  Donald Scott, who is the author of the Electric Sky: A Challenge to the Myths of Modern Astronomy, explains yet another possibility to the origin of matter.

That's atrocious. I'm willing to ignore that the scientific claims are bonkers, but that is not good writing, the first and second sentence don't follow from each other. How about "Donald Scott, author of "Electric Sky:...", challenges the scientific consensus in astrophysics and cosmology and aims to expose it as the product of a corrupt scientific community. He instead offers his own explanation for the origin of matter: "

Or something