Michael Mozina wrote:But they don't want real empirical answers from real empirical physics. They love their invisible magic unicorns. They are professionally, emotionally and financially attached to their invisible unicorns.
What they practice isn't physics but a cult like religion.
As I've pointed out in the past, modern day astrophysics has all the characteristics of a cult.
For example ...
**********
1) Cults pretend to possess indisputable truths about the past, present, and future. Aren’t Big Bang proponents claiming to possess indisputable truths about the past, present and future? Down to the minutest detail? Even into the state of the universe billions of years past and future?
2) Cults stubbornly refuse to debate their dogma, calling it “settled science” (in this case) and viciously attacking critics. Getting cult member to actually debate is well nigh impossible.
3) Cults have a formal doctrine-setting body … in this case the mainstream physicist priesthood and bodies like NASA. Cult followers regularly appeal to their authority to justify their beliefs in the dogma.
4) Cults have a priest class. Cult members sincerely believe that only members of the priest class are capable of understanding and seriously discussing the cult doctrine. That’s exactly the situation with regards to Big Bang cosmology. Higgsy and Bob are a case in point. Big Bang proponents believe only astrophysicists are capable of understanding what we see out there in the universe. Electrical engineers and plasma scientists need not apply. And the astrophysicists the mainstream cites regarding plasma and magnetic fields are completely disconnected from the eminent scientists who founded those disciplines. All those who speak out against cults are attacked or defamed. Such is the situation with regards to those opposing the Big Bang gnomes.
5) Scientific cults appear to worship idols ... in this case, computer models that the priesthood have built based on cult doctrine. With respect to Big Bang, Black Hole, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, etc cosmology, computer models are the only thing *degreed physicists* have. Observations haven't proven a thing nor corroborated their computer models.
6) Scientific cults deny, ignore, or distort elementary scientific facts, some of which should be known even to kids. How is constantly calling what’s out there "gas" and not "plasma" anything but denying, ignoring and distorting elementary scientific fact, which should be known to even kids? Don't the school texts tell children that the universe is 99.999% plasma? Yes, they do.
7) Cults often appeal to medieval science errors. Isn’t there something medieval about scientists insisting the universe had a beginning? After all, the Church, one of the biggest institutions to come out of the medieval period, is a big supporter of the Big Bang theory because it too believes in a moment of creation rather than continuous creation and no end either way to the universe. It’s even formally endorsed Big Bang.
8) Cults create and spread mythology, sometimes intentionally modeled on archaic misbeliefs that many member attribute to their religion. Aren’t all the gnomes of Big Bang cosmology (inflation, black holes, dark matter, dark energy, frozen magnetic fields, etc, etc, etc) essentially mythologies that have been created out of whole cloth much like demons and angels?
9) Like an established religion, the Big Bang cult posits a beginning to time. Absolute belief in this is of paramount importance to the cult. Isn’t the start date for the Big Bang cult, when instruments recorded objects whose interpreted motions and distances seemed to suggest an origin back in the distant past ... some 13.8 billion years ago ... in a single point, more important to Big Bangers than almost anything else?
10) Cult are almost always eschatological … believing in calamities, catastrophes, and the end of the world. Big Bang cosmologists have some people fearing the creation of black holes in their super colliders. Others fear the creation of a new universe in those same machines. And then inherent in the Big Bang Theory is the ultimate death of the universe … either the Big Crunch or the Big Freeze. What could be more "eschatological"? Except perhaps the belief that Dark Matter spells humanities doom (see
http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/8 ... rgy-survey ).
11) The Big Bang cult calls its dogma “science” but fails to make any scientific (i.e., non-trivial and testable) statements. This is because when cultists make testable statements, they often can be proven to be incorrect. So the Big Bang cult calls its dogma science but fails to make any scientific (i.e., non-trivial and testable) statements. Instead, it's accolates just declare “Big Bang is real”, a trivial statement. The statements about string theory are not practically testable. The claims about dark matter are ultimately untestable given the *substances* claimed properties.
12) Cults try to seek and exert control over governments. Big Bang cosmologists certainly have sought to do that. How else have they gotten the governments of the world to shell out the BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars that have gone into costly instrument after costly instrument … all seeking to prove the existence of the countless gnomes that the astrophysicists have created out of whole cloth?
See what I mean?
Michael Mozina wrote:I haven't heard Bob stick his foot in his mouth yet, so maybe there's hope for Bob, but clearly Higgsy doesn't have a clue about plasma physics.
He’s said of plenty of stupid stuff, Michael and is now in running mode … focusing on Aaadwolf's hypothesis rather than deal with ANYTHING we are now discussing from the original conversation. I can’t get him to respond to a single post I’ve made recently, yet he’s the one who caused my involvement in this debate with the statement “If you can't even answer simple questions about a model, then you shouldn't be putting it forward as a possible explanation.” Ironic, huh?