Global Warming: Junk Mathematics

I've never yet heard an argument against the big bang which had anything to do with Christianity. Again for people who haven't seen it, about a hundred of the world's best physicists are now on record to the effect that the big bang idea is kaput, and the reasons for this have everything to do with physics and nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion:

gsnake wrote:

Quote:

I've never yet heard an argument against the big bang which had anything to do with Christianity. Again for people who haven't seen it, about a hundred of the world's best physicists are now on record to the effect that the big bang idea is kaput, and the reasons for this have everything to do with physics and nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion:

Heck, there are at least 100 kooks in every profession...

A short list of the leading problems faced by the big bang in its struggle for viability as a theory:

1. Static universe models fit the data better than expanding universe models.

2. The microwave "background" makes more sense as the limiting temperature of space heated by starlight than as the remnant of a fireball.

3. Element abundance predictions using the big bang require too many adjustable parameters to make them work.

4. The universe has too much large scale structure (interspersed "walls" and voids) to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.

5. The average luminosity of quasars must decrease with time in just the right way so that their mean apparent brightness is the same at all redshifts, which is exceedingly unlikely.

6. The ages of globular clusters appear older than the universe.

7. The local streaming motions of galaxies are too high for a finite universe that is supposed to be everywhere uniform.

8. Invisible dark matter of an unknown but non-baryonic nature must be the dominant ingredient of the entire universe.

9. The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them apparently having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the faintest quasars.

10. If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.

Adrian, how do you judge who is "good" physicist and who isn't?

There actually is away that people in the profession judge who is credible and who isn't. Physicists all dedicate their lives to mastering their craft. Those with ideas, publish and these ideas, and the evidence that support them, are judged by their peers.

How would you make this decision, besides picking the ones who agree with your particular dogma?

100% of the good ones question it.

I'd also love to know who decided they were 100 of the "best".

Lola wrote:

gsnake wrote:

Quote:

I've never yet heard an argument against the big bang which had anything to do with Christianity. Again for people who haven't seen it, about a hundred of the world's best physicists are now on record to the effect that the big bang idea is kaput, and the reasons for this have everything to do with physics and nothing to do with Christianity or any other religion:

Heck, there are at least 100 kooks in every profession...

BWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahaaaahaha hahahah hahahahahahah hahahah hhahahahahhhhhhahahahaaaaaaa hahahahaha hahahah hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha........

9. The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them apparently having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the faintest quasars.

What about the ones who look for evidence of Creationism?

After all, THOSE will be the ones cited by the faction that denies the Global Warming phenomena...
("Why worry about Global Warming, it's just part of God's Master Plan!")

A "Born Again" friend of mine told me he's not concerned about conservation or fossil fuel use since, after all, there's more than enough there to get us through to the "imminent" Second Coming... and THEN we won't have to worry about it anymore!

( He imparted this bit of wisdom to me as he was gassing up to go see some NASCAR Racing!)

Gungasnake, the guy you are quoting is no scientist, and this is the proof:

guy wrote:

9. The most distant galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field show insufficient evidence of evolution, with some of them apparently having higher redshifts (z = 6-7) than the faintest quasars.

Nobody who looks to distant galaxies for evidence of evolution has any credibility in science.

Since when did galaxies evolve?

Good, I was starting to worry that half the people in the US might think the world would end in the next decade. In europe that sentiment is almost as widespread as evolution denial. (1% ? Nah, less)