The standards of evidence in astronomy are just too lax.

[Michael Mozina]

One reoccurring problem in astronomy over the past century is the incredibly weak standard of 'evidence' that is used and applied in the field of astronomy, compared to other areas of science. It is a substandard form of evidence which is unlike any other area of science. Most branches of science are empirical by their very definition. Things either work in the lab, or they don't, and there's a clear distinction between the two. In other areas of science there is an automatic sense of favoritism that is given to all "empirical' solutions to problems.

Astronomy however has become almost completely detached from empirical laboratory physics. The only part of LCMD theory which can be directly tested in the lab is their cold dark matter claim, and it's been an epic and dismal failure of billion dollar proportions.

The other core elements of LCDM cosmology today, like "space expansion", inflation and dark energy cannot be demonstrated or even tested in a lab. They are ultimately pure "acts of faith" on the part of the "true believer" in the LCDM dogma package from day one. It's more like a religion than a form of "science".

As long as any idea comes with some "mathematical lipstick", it's pretty much anything goes in the field of astronomy, everything from M-theory, to "magnetic reconnection".

Birkeland's solar wind model works in the lab. Using electric fields, Birkeland produced a working model of the planetary aurora. Chapman however took a purely "mathematical" approach to the problem, and since astronomers have such lax substandards of evidence, they wallowed around in ignorance for 60 years until satellites in space proved that Birkeland was right and Chapman was wrong about the aurora. At the rate they're going it could be another 60 years before the mainstream finally figures out that Birkeland was right about the cause of solar wind and the fact that it's driven by an electric field.

That same "math only" substandard approach to physics is what allows astronomers to flat out *ignore* the ordinary inelastic scattering processes that take place in plasma here on Earth. It allows them to 'pretend' that such empirically demonstrated influences on light in a plasma medium do not apply to photons and plasma in space, and proclaim that "space expansion did it" when it comes to cause of photon redshift.

It's astronomers "math only" substandard form of evidence that has allowed and enabled them to pretend to justify the legitimacy of their "dark matter" claims related to that Bullet Cluster study in 2006, but their mathematical models were all wrong with respect to their baryonic mass estimates. They simply buried their collective heads in the sand and they pretend that it doesn't matter!

The dark energy metaphysical kludge also came about because of their 'math only' substandard of evidence, but again, the *assumptions* that the concept was based upon (standard candles) is now known to be less than accurate, and the larger set of SN!A events put the whole acceleration possibility at only around 3 sigma at best.

Inflation is a textbook example of pure mathematics run amuck. Not only is there never going to be a way to 'test' it empirically, it's not even possible to falsify the concept because it can be "modified to fit"" just about any observation that we might think of. The primary mathematical justification for inflation that was originally used to sell inflation is that inflation somehow explained how and why the universe was 'flat". Penrose however later demonstrated that it was 10 to the 100th power *less* likely that the universe would be flat *with* inflation than without it. The mainstream doesn't even look the math squarely in the eye when doesn't work in their favor as those hemispheric variations in the CMB demonstrate as well.

The LIGO claims are just the latest example of their 'math only' approach to physics turning into a complete fiasco. They expect us to believe that two invisible merging "black holes" in galaxies far, far away must have caused a few invisible waves to create "signal transients" in their data set, based on a completely *biased* methodology, and based on a sigma figure that means absolutely nothing with respect to the actual claim that is being made. There's of course no visual support of any kind. Since there are entirely invisible "one off" events, there's not even a logical way to test their claim independently without making a ton of similar assumptions about the data set as they did. Nonetheless, the paper publishing feeding frenzy on gravitational waves is already in high gear.

The whole field of astronomy has become no better than astrology in 2017. Like astrology, their cosmology beliefs have some mathematical window dressing in there to make it look "legit", but it's got no empirical substance whatsoever, and no practical value and no predictive value in labs here on Earth. It really is so bad that there's no empirical tangible difference between astrology and astronomy today. They're both mathematical mythologies based on "unseen forces" controlling the destiny of humans on Earth.

It's *painfully* clear that astronomy needs to go back to the drawing board, go back to the lab, and return itself to real world of empirical physics. Astronomers today have become almost completely detached from reality, and their mathematics is simply pretty red lipstick on a complete metaphysical pig.

It's disheartening to see astronomy in such a sad state in 2017. What was once the queen of physics has now become the court jester.

[Metryq]

I'm just waiting for some establishment astronomer to claim that an electric field in the 27th parallel dimension of the primeval atom is what causes accelerating expansion—because the universe has to be expanding, that's a given. Yet within "our own dimension" the electric field cannot be detected (space being a vacuum) except through reconnection of magnetic fields that are "frozen in" to the "fabric of space" since the Big Bang.

Math is Truth™

[oz93666]

Well said Michael !! ...

Although to be precise I think you are talking about astrophysics ... from a search ....

"....., astronomy is the science of measuring the positions and characteristics of heavenly bodies, and astrophysics is the application of physics to understand astronomy.... "

I don't believe this condition just came about ... unseen hands are directing things this way to keep humanity in ignorance ... It's very similar to art ... there no sanity in art anymore , it's all bluster and a con trick ..

The CIA have admitted they created modern art as a 'weapon' ... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 78808.html..

In Both art and astrophysics the emperor has no clothes!

[Michael Mozina]

I'm just waiting for some establishment astronomer to claim that an electric field in the 27th parallel dimension of the primeval atom is what causes accelerating expansion—because the universe has to be expanding, that's a given. Yet within "our own dimension" the electric field cannot be detected (space being a vacuum) except through reconnection of magnetic fields that are "frozen in" to the "fabric of space" since the Big Bang.

Math is Truth™

Now don't be giving them any new ideas.....

The LIGO fiasco in particular seems like the epitome of dumb things that can be done with math, and I thought BICEP2 was bad. At least the BICEP2 claim was based on something which we could directly observe.

Consider LIGO's claim for a moment with a little objectivity, and look how far down the invisible rabbit hole we have gone.

LIGO is claiming that two invisible things in a galaxy far far away, merged together in a quarter of a second to create another invisible object in space, while releasing several solar masses of energy into an "invisible" form of energy which billions of years later makes a "transient" spike show up in their equipment. The transient
is physically and statistically indistinguishable from ordinary environmental noise. Since it is indistinguishable from the normal background noise, they simply stripped out the background noise, and fudged a useless 5 sigma figure on the "statistical noise" to claim a 'discovery" which ultimately has nothing to do with their claim as to cause. Now of course none of that math even works in the first place unless we simply overlook the *blatant* confirmation bias that is required to claim to have eliminated every *other* potential cause of the signal based on a lack of external support, while simply giving all invisible celestial events a complete free pass! Oy Vey.

The mathematical and logical contradictions of that particular claim are simply *off scale*. Not only doesn't the math they created relate to anything useful, it's downright contrived and manipulated at every single step of the way.

Math may be truth alright, but all that LIGO math demonstrates is the truth of their overt manipulation of the facts.

[Michael Mozina]

...the emperor has no clothes!

Oh come now. His fine new clothing just doesn't interact with the EM spectrum.

It just *looks* like he's naked.

[BeAChooser]

What was once the queen of physics has now become the court jester.

Yep.