Astrophysics is having a groundhog day experience.

[Michael Mozina]

I recently watched the most recent episode of "Space's Deepest Secrets", entitled "Secret History of Dark Matter" which aired for the first time on 12/18/17. It was like being stuck in a time warp. It should have been called the "Whitewashed history of dark matter" because they didn't even mention a single failed experiment in the whole hour long presentation!

They had the same basic cast of characters spewing exactly the same dogma they repeated over a decade ago. Astronomy is apparently having a groundhog day experience that's lasted for decades now. There was no mention of the massive hot plasma halo they found around our own galaxy five years ago which may contain more mass than all the stars combined, or the massive gas halo they found earlier this year. There was no mention of all the errors in their now infamous bullet cluster study either. The same exact show could have (probably was) produced a decade ago particularly since it failed to mention anything that's happened in the last decade.

'Wimps" still got the "most probable" thumbs up even after failing billions of dollars worth of test. There wasn't even a hint of anything new, and it was a complete waste of my time.

What really bugged me about the show was the utter lack of any hint of any mention of all those failed lab tests, or those plasma and gas halos we found. It was certainly no 'secret" history of dark matter, it was a whitewashed history where the viewers were simply kept in the dark about the fact we've tested their popular models and they've all failed.

There was of course the obligatory plug for multiverse theory in spite of any evidence to support it. I think they simply get tired of mentioning that they haven't a clue what i it might be and they needed more filler material to make it a longer show. The whole show could have been condensed to a single sentence: "'Nope, we still have no clue how to explain the universe."

I can see why the average Joe simply tunes out and doesn't care about astronomy. If they were curious about 20 year ago, they've been hearing the same nonsense for decades. LCDM is big snooze of a theory and it has no real answers to offer anyone. They literally probably saw the same folks repeating exactly the same nonsense for at least the last 15 years. No progress at all.

[Metryq]

I've knocked heads with a few "science fans" on other discussion forums—usually forums that have nothing to do with science. They're all establishment standard bearers, and they go berserk if you challenge it in any way. Well, to be honest, I've run into a paltry few who will be polite, make noises as though they're giving you the benefit of the doubt. But there's just "no way all those scientists are wrong."

Aside from being lousy scientists, they're bad historians, too.

[Michael Mozina]

I've knocked heads with a few "science fans" on other discussion forums—usually forums that have nothing to do with science. They're all establishment standard bearers, and they go berserk if you challenge it in any way. Well, to be honest, I've run into a paltry few who will be polite, make noises as though they're giving you the benefit of the doubt. But there's just "no way all those scientists are wrong."

Aside from being lousy scientists, they're bad historians, too.

I have very similar experiences when I discuss the EU/PC model on various forums. Usually the claim that "no way all those scientists are wrong" gets blown out of the water over their "dark matter" fiasco. I don't think there's ever been a bigger scientific boondoggle in the history of physics. All those scientists have been shown to be wrong repeatedly and often.

The hostility aspect is pretty much par for the course with EU/PC haters in my experience. They typically have no idea what EU/PC theory is about, so most of their attention is fixated on the individual rather than the topic. When they do try to discuss the actual topic, it's usually pretty hysterical how often and how deeply they stick their own foot in their mouth. My most recent discussion of this topic is pretty much a "classic" in that regard. I don't know how the two EU/PC haters (selfsim and sjastro) could have possibly made themselves look any more foolish if they tried.

https://www.christianforums.com/threads ... y.8040392/

[Metryq]

Those guys are unquestionably being partisan, not scientific.

To be charitable, I think the big hurdle with PC/EU is that it is literally a paradigm shift—everything changes, not just one or two adjustments to the model. It really sounds fruitcake to start with "everything you know is wrong." I have to remind those making an honest attempt to understand that they will not "get it" all at once. To borrow from Yoda, they must unlearn so much of what they have learned (or been indoctrinated with). Most lay people have no idea how much of what we "know" is really speculation repeated until it becomes "fact." For example, black holes are a fact, not a shot-in-the-dark guess for observations that can be explained in other, more "mundane" ways. If you try to explain that black holes do not exist, most will get stubborn and think you are denying observed phenomena, rather than the explanations for them.

Another example: an honest newbie might stumble over the expanding universe idea. They've heard it countless times that redshift is caused by the Doppler effect. How does EU explain that? PC/EU proponents know there are many mechanisms that can cause redshifting. At the very least, the work of Halton Arp shows that Doppler is an unworkable assumption. They refuse to let go of Big Bang until something better comes along, but they will never learn the alternatives until Big Bang is pried away from them one detail at a time.

I've introduced several people to PC/EU. And I find the Thunderbolts "Electric Comet" documentary a good, Solar system sized start. If one can entertain the idea of an electric Sun, the rest unfolds from there. A planetary circuit without "bow shocks" and "winds" paves the way for more complex ideas.