Yet another nail in the coffin for the standard model of the universe.

Not only do they continue flogging a dead horse but they keep adding to the theory every time they are wrong, which has turned it into Frankenstein's monster.

No rational person could agree that the universe came from nothing, it either has to come from SOMETHING, which means the universe is contained in something greater than it, or the universe is infinite and has always, and will always, exist.

To view later.

Yet if the evidence supports the Bible, God created from nothing.

Science as Ideology is a religion. It's not obvious because we've been "blinded by science," as Thomas Dolby would say. We find its results pleasing, but the underlying belief that anything in the scientific endeavor involves Truth or Reality is completely groundless and based on faith.

Its like some insane rerun of the old Ptolomaic geo centric solar system with old Aristarchus nainly arguing for common sense, and yet we were doomed to 1,400 years of dogmatic idiocy.
So here we are again repeating the mistakes of history.

Your computer overlords are forbidden from allowing one to possess knowledge and understanding of the holographic nature of the universe.

Its just like adding more spheres within spheres. Which almost, but never quite pins it down.

If we could just put aside Cepheid variables as a measure of distance and assume red shift is an optical illusion it all starts to make a lot more sense, just two 'unkowns' against a myriad of complex theorising that never quite works.

Bit of a 'no brainer' if you ask me. ;)

Pretty much what the video I linked talks about. It's a vicious cycle where these assumptions are used to build the foundation of a future scientist's career. And when the evidence shows up contrary to the beliefs they were taught in university, they look for ways to patch up the sinking theory instead of letting it sink and come up with something better. What makes it worse is how people are persecuted when they try to follow the evidence and observations and come to their own conclusions like Halton Arp.

If you run against the current paradigm you're an outcast and will have trouble getting anywhere because you don't belong to the "club". I'll be compiling a list of recent findings where the standard model predicts dark matter etc and the actual experiments show otherwise like CERN and ICECUBE.

It's annoying, because they try to cram any anomaly into the existing model.

It's pretty arrogant when you think about it but anyone who dares to try to work from a blank slate is ostracized and can't get their shit properly peer reviewed so it's disregarded and lost.

Who knows how many breakthroughs have been lost due to the politics of science.

Great post OP.

Scientists who refuse to acknowledge God as the Creator of everything will keep chasing and chasing and chasing and chasing.
God was, is and always will be. Everything that He created is Glory. It exists in time and space, and outside it.

Right yeah... but that answers nothing so we will still chase.

For example, God created the Universe yeah? All well and good, but WHAT is God and HOW is he able to achieve these feats?

Annnd here we go again!

Written in 1875 by Scottish Physicists - The Unseen Universe:

[link to www.archive.org]

Dark matter

I agree..the universal time space continuum has always had a base elemental constructs of materials, energies and matter, and effectively and endless chaotic cycle of random action and semi-predictable interaction and responces based on the conditional variables involved - effecting and influence the behaivour of each an every event.

The issue is not therefore to try and establish any official fake or theoretical starting points..because there never was one (origin point) to start with..instead the reality could be like the observable universe, with infinite spontainious and continuous creational events..which make far more sense in reality, as this model is still highly relevant and observable today.

The big bang theory is an intelectually nieve as other human beliefs in either a polar positive god or singular universal energy (the habit of wanting things to always be neat, orderly and logical, is perhaps one of our fundemental problems, as it reduces our ability to see,understand, accept and explain the true reality of universal chaos and duality within all things).

Everything observable today (especially in the physical realm) has always evolved through random, collective and selective interaction, through the circumstances of mutual action and reaction/response.

Chaos is potentially the true nature and order of reality..only we (and perhaps other advanced(?) organic forms) are not very good or happy about dealing with the consiquences of that fundemental truth.

Personally whilst admittingly challenging, unpredictable and unstable (due to the depth, bredth and scales of the interactions involved - i.e. from sub atomic partical through to cosmic celstial levels) it is remarkable and magical to live, see,and witness...as human beings.

But in reality it doesn't matter what we choose to believe or value...because the process is infinite and never ending...and what comes around goes around because of it LOL.

Unfortunately all religion and beliefs have caused are conflicts and divisions. Science on the other hand has helped shape our world and our understanding of the universe and reality will allow us to go much further.

What you believe is meaningless and allows people to selectively pick parts of reality which don't conflict with their beliefs. And somehow I don't think reality likes to be ignored. If people's beliefs don't match up with reality, it then becomes a lie, one which people force themselves to believe.

Just find it odd how people don't really seem to care that their tax payer money is going to scientific research based on a lie instead of to people who actually want to understand the universe we coexist with. Roughly 100 years ago this theory came into existence and just think of how many people, how much time, effort and money has gone into this one single theory of the universe. And look how many times they've had to add to it, change it, just to make observations fit. It's not a theory anymore. It's a religion.

But we know so little about the bigger picture...... It's heart warming to see them constantly searching searching, learning. One day we will get to where we need to be.

Maybe on an individual level we may not know much. But collectively? Together as humans we have learned so much already about our planet and we have a lot of information, more than enough to understand the universe enough to start seeing the bigger picture, so to speak.

The information is there, we just have to stop the bullshit and put it together in a way that reflects reality and gives us a better understanding of how things work and applying it to expanding life out into the universe as well as gaining more information about the nature of reality/universe.

It's hard to understand the universe objectively because we are a part of it. We don't just live here, we are it. The biggest problem is that the universe is so vast and the processes that happen in it are either invisible to us or happen on such long time scales that we'd never observe them fully.

If the universe was alive, wouldn't it want to know what it was? And how could it know what it was if it was the only thing in existence.

Thanks for the link, looks interesting, I love how he had to make 5 editions in order not to piss too many people off. I'll read it tomorrow. Also seems like a nice website.

I hate how scientists think they are so high and mighty and know everything.

They don't even fully understand how the human brain works.

Why is it so hard for people to say, we don't know, and we may never know.

Does an ant understand themselves? Maybe, maybe not. It's time for the egotistical human to realize that we are not the end of evolution, and there are certain things that are just out of our ability to understand.

The cosmic neutrino background (CNB, CνB) is the universe's background particle radiation composed of neutrinos.

Like the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), the CνB is a relic of the big bang, and while the CMB dates from when the universe was 379,000 years old, the CνB decoupled from matter when the universe was 2 seconds old. It is estimated that today the CνB has a temperature of roughly 1.95 K. Since low-energy neutrinos interact only very weakly with matter, they are notoriously difficult to detect and the CνB might never be observed directly. There is, however, compelling indirect evidence for its existence.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

This is hilarious because this so called "compelling" evidence is all based on redshift, which can never be proved from our planet alone. Then there is this, in order to explain away yet another failure of the model they now have HOT and COLD dark matter. What a joke.

Hot dark matter is a hypothetical form of dark matter(that in itself is hypothetical) which consists of particles that travel with ultrarelativistic velocities. The best candidate for the identity of hot dark matter is the neutrino. Neutrinos have very small masses, and do not take part in two of the four fundamental forces, the electromagnetic interaction and the strong interaction. They do interact by the weak interaction, and gravity, but due to the feeble strength of these forces, they are difficult to detect.

Dark matter is matter that cannot be detected by electromagnetic radiation, hence dark. It is postulated to exist to explain how clusters and superclusters of galaxies formed after the big bang. Data from galaxy rotation curves indicate that around 90% of the mass of a galaxy cannot be seen. It can only be detected by its gravitational effect.

Hot dark matter cannot explain how individual galaxies formed from the big bang. The microwave background radiation as measured by the COBE satellite is very smooth and fast moving particles cannot clump together on this small scale from such a smooth initial clumping. To explain small scale structure in the Universe it is necessary to invoke cold or warm dark matter. Hot dark matter therefore is nowadays always discussed as part of a mixed dark matter theory.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The first hint that neutrinos – perhaps the most ghostly of these – existed came in 1930 when a physicist, Wolfgang Pauli, noticed that in certain nuclear processes, particles would jump off in random directions as if they’d been pushed.

He guessed that this was because there was another unseen particle involved (the neutrino) that was giving them a kick in the opposite direction.

The problem? While the particle he proposed turned out to be very convenient for his theory, it also turned out to be very hard to detect.
[link to theconversation.edu.au]

I wonder how many billions have gone into building detectors such as the ICECUBE?

"The massive telescope, which is the size of a cubic kilometer and located 1400 meters underground, took a decade to build and cost approximately $271 million."
[link to tommytoy.typepad.com]

Here's some of the many experiments and detectors and telescopes that are all trying to find just this one theoretical particle just to explain away something they could not understand or explain almost 100 years ago.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

The National Science Foundation has signed a five-year, $34.5-million agreement with the University
of Wisconsin-Madison to operate a unique telescope--a cubic kilometer in volume--buried in the
Antarctic ice sheet between 1,400 meters and 2,400 meters deep.
[link to docs.google.com]

Watch this guys videos, too. He's nailed quite a lot of things about our universe, dark matter being silly is one thing he covers.

[link to www.youtube.com]

Good post OP.
5*'s

Don't be so judgemental. They are just smart. And they are using this to scam money looking for something they know they will never find. Not every scientist is like this, there are many people who really do want to understand the universe and reality. Unfortunately those people either have to keep their thoughts and theories to themselves or find themselves up against the standard model gang. But the only kind of regulation from groups like the NSF comes from scientists who probably made a living from these theories.

Scientists can only do what they do if they have the money and resources to do so. Our human senses are just not enough to understand the universe enough to make sense and actually reflect reality. We've tried that and it gave birth to religion. That really worked out well for us hasn't it?

They aren't smart enough to realize that some things are out of our understanding. Smart enough to realize that we should be living in tune with nature, not with this technology, that is poisoning the earth.

Why do we need to understand how things work, if we just lived in harmony with nature everything would be ok.

You're a moron. That IS the nature of science (unlike religion) to look for the truth, to change, to adapt, to prove wrong. Science is doing what science does. It took Edison 2,000 attempts to come up with a working light bulb. Bet you'd call that a religion too.

Unless you are steeped in Physics, take your blather elsewhere.

right, because that worked great for the indigenous peoples of the world after meeting westerners. if we try to mimic them, some one else will act like we do now and kill us off. finding the balance between technology and sustainable energy sources is the key.

I studied physics in college. My advisor who wrote a
relativity text, wasn't a big fan of cosmologists. They
tend to make claims far in excess of what there is evidence
for.

Personally it wouldn't surprise me one bit if dark matter
is simply overlooked normal dark matter (cold rocks). Or
is something not currently understood about gravity, or
even another as yet to be discovered force.

Of course it could really be invisible particles. But I've
not seen conclusive evidence to assume it must be.

Not technically cold rocks, cold gas giants.

Yep, science is looking to disprove its own 'theories' all the time. That is how science works. Religion is the rigid/firm never changing entity.

Physicists are a little dismayed in that it looks like a unifying theory of everything is practically impossible if laws are different throughout. We are still making huge strides in science and will continue to.

Science is tricky. You'd think it was apolitical, cause it's a pursuit of truth, but because most experimental science is dependent on funds from big foundations or govt., those groups can dictate the research. Also, whenever the "leading thinkers" in a field endorse something it constrains the funding to be more along their line of thinking. I think internet funding is important to maintaining the integrity of science going forward, where people can give small donations (or big) like they would for a political campaign, but in this case towards research they find interesting. I also find the state bank (like North Dakota) to be important cause it will decentralize funding and in fact create more funding for new businesses across the board and money for research. Additional benefits include decentralizing govt. and banker control, keeping states solvent in this time of wealth confiscation and centralization (perhaps by design?), and the interest paid actually goes back into your state for additional projects within the state instead of to big bankers without any allegiance to your state.