Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bjarne said:
Tell me which images do you get inside your head when I say "curvature of space"
...inane gibberish snipped...
Click to expand...
The image I get in my head when you say curvature of space is you in a cow costume :D.

The image I get in my head when someone correctly says curvature of space-time is the usual explanation of the curvature of space-time explained in all of those places you are ignorant of, e.g. Wikipedia.
 
Bjarne said:
...gibberish snipped...
What is this big hole in the Universe doing – NOT predicted by BB http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/1548/hole-a-billion-light-years-across-discovered
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow -
Click to expand...
What is the ignorance that you cannot understand that the hole and dark flow have nothing to do with the Big Bang and may not even exist?

What is the evidence for the Big Bang?

Bjarne;7816643Read this top 30 problem with BigBang [URL said:
http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp[/URL]

And as i wrote every year the list is getting longer.
Click to expand...
And as you write, you show your inability to understand what you read and link to a crank web site.
And you need to learnt to count to 10 :rolleyes:!
You also need to learn that sceince progresses - this list is from 2002.
The WMAP results were not released then. All we knew about the CMB was
  1. Its temperature which matches the predictions of the Big Bang theory (and other theories).
  2. The spectrum of the CMB is a perfect black-body spectrum. This can only be explained by the Big Bang theory because it means that the universe was once small enough so that all of the photons in it could get to thermal equilibrium.
Thw WMAP data has given us the primary anisotropy of the CMB which the Big Bang model fits.

The rest of the page is usual crank ignorance:
  1. A lie.
  2. A lie.
  3. A lie.
  4. A lie.
  5. Arp's debunked idea.
  6. A lie. Globular clusters are not older than the universe.
  7. A lie. Dark matter has been detected.
  8. A lie.
  9. A lie - metals in galaxies does decrease with distance.
  10. A lie - observations have confirmed inflation
The rest is just a rant about Ned Wright's web site where an actual astronomer lists the errors in various alternative cosmologies:
Errors in Irving Segal's Chronometric Cosmology
Errors in Eric Lerner's "The Big Bang Never Happened"
Errors in tired light models
Errors in the Steady State and QSSC Models
Eddington did not predict the CMB

Bjarne: Cite your 'loads of contradictions' for the Big Bang
First asked 21st October 2011 (46 days and counting!)
 
Bjarne said:
Many model predict this, also the one I just desibed above.
Have you seen the video I linked few days ago, - a lot of model can explain CMB, so stop taking patent on it , my dear.
Click to expand...
Oh my dear you are so ignorant to be citing videos instead of the science.

The Big Bang explains the CMB's temperature, spectrum and primary anisotropy.

Bjarne: Cite your 'loads of contradictions' for the Big Bang
First asked 21st October 2011 (46 days and counting!)
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
What is the ignorance that you cannot understand that the hole and dark flow have nothing to do with the Big Bang and may not even exist?

What is the evidence for the Big Bang?


And as you write, you show your inability to understand what you read and link to a crank web site.
And you need to learnt to count to 10 :rolleyes:!
You also need to learn that sceince progresses - this list is from 2002.
The WMAP results were not released then. All we knew about the CMB was
  1. Its temperature which matches the predictions of the Big Bang theory (and other theories).
  2. The spectrum of the CMB is a perfect black-body spectrum. This can only be explained by the Big Bang theory because it means that the universe was once small enough so that all of the photons in it could get to thermal equilibrium.
Thw WMAP data has given us the primary anisotropy of the CMB which the Big Bang model fits.

The rest of the page is usual crank ignorance:
  1. A lie.
  2. A lie.
  3. A lie.
  4. A lie.
  5. Arp's debunked idea.
  6. A lie. Globular clusters are not older than the universe.
  7. A lie. Dark matter has been detected.
  8. A lie.
  9. A lie - metals in galaxies does decrease with distance.
  10. A lie - observations have confirmed inflation
The rest is just a rant about Ned Wright's web site where an actual astronomer lists the errors in various alternative cosmologies:
Errors in Irving Segal's Chronometric Cosmology
Errors in Eric Lerner's "The Big Bang Never Happened"
Errors in tired light models
Errors in the Steady State and QSSC Models
Eddington did not predict the CMB

Bjarne: Cite your 'loads of contradictions' for the Big Bang
First asked 21st October 2011 (46 days and counting!)
Click to expand...

As i wrote BB is a religion
 
Reality Check said:
Oh my dear you are so ignorant to be citing videos instead of the science.

The Big Bang explains the CMB's temperature, spectrum and primary anisotropy.

Bjarne: Cite your 'loads of contradictions' for the Big Bang
First asked 21st October 2011 (46 days and counting!)
Click to expand...


Why did you not saw the video ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yTfRy0LTD0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deMPlC1rc7U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kePDAAEZ_s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf49V9QYU-k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILIRSsGyXKM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy0KBzipGK4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L01PU3r6fmA&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_8webbsiB4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qH6XAacQuRs

http://natureorgod.lefora.com/2011/10/17/the-big-bang-never-happened/
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
As i wrote BB is a religion
Click to expand...
That is truly delusional. BB is a scientific theory.
Even your cows know the difference.

What is the evidence for the Big Bang?
The evidence for the Big Bang comes from many pieces of observational data that are consistent with the Big Bang. None of these prove the Big Bang, since scientific theories are not proven. Many of these facts are consistent with the Big Bang and some other cosmological models, but taken together these observations show that the Big Bang is the best current model for the Universe. These observations include:
The observations listed above are consistent with the Big Bang or with the Steady State model, but many observations support the Big Bang over the Steady State:
  • Radio source and quasar counts vs. flux. These show that the Universe has evolved.
  • Existence of the blackbody CMB. This shows that the Universe has evolved from a dense, isothermal state.
  • Variation of TCMB with redshift. This is a direct observation of the evolution of the Universe.
  • Deuterium, 3He, 4He, and 7Li abundances. These light isotopes are all well fit by predicted reactions occurring in the First Three Minutes.
Finally, the angular power spectrum of the CMB anisotropy that does exist at the several parts per million level is consistent with a dark matter dominated Big Bang model that went through the inflationary scenario.
Click to expand...
 
Bjarne said:
Why did you not saw the video ?
Click to expand...
I am not going to waste my time on Lerner's debunked ideas presented in a multi-part video.
Errors in Eric Lerner's "The Big Bang Never Happened"

Even Lerner has abandoned his model since he has not published anything on it lately (probably since he realized that the WMAP measurement debunked it).

But maybe I am wrong: Bjarne, cite Lerner's latest works on hids model from the last 2 or 3 years.
 
Bjarne said:
Yehh and a cow walking at the earth also does so, when it walk a long distance, but this does not explain what space does, does it `?
Click to expand...

Cows generally don't explain anything.

But then, neither do you. You keep talking about matter contracting space, but you don't explain what either is. You keep talking about Sw, but you don't explain what it is. You keep taking about RR, but you don't explain what it is.

Hans
 
 
MRC_Hans said:
Cows generally don't explain anything.

But then, neither do you. You keep talking about matter contracting space, but you don't explain what either is. You keep talking about Sw, but you don't explain what it is. You keep taking about RR, but you don't explain what it is.

Hans
Click to expand...

So we can conclude; yours & Co's (not cow's) religion is not better than mine and cow's.
 
Last edited:
Adding comments has been disabled for this video.

Funny how those videos can't be commented on now.


Paul

:) :) :)
 
Anyhow, we can see that Bjarne has retreated to every believer's last stand:

If you cannot support your own position, you can always try to discredit the opposition.

So, let me make it abundantly clear:

Even IF the main-stream scientific position should turn out to be wrong,
even IF there was a general tendency to suppress controversial theories,

your ideas, Bjarne, would still be nonsense. This is not because they are controversial, but because they don't make sense. They are simply incoherent, and they are contradicted by known facts. You simply know too little to produce a coherent model.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
Anyhow, we can see that Bjarne has retreated to every believer's last stand:

If you cannot support your own position, you can always try to discredit the opposition.

So, let me make it abundantly clear:

Even IF the main-stream scientific position should turn out to be wrong,
even IF there was a general tendency to suppress controversial theories,

your ideas, Bjarne, would still be nonsense. This is not because they are controversial, but because they don't make sense. They are simply incoherent, and they are contradicted by known facts. You simply know too little to produce a coherent model.

Hans
Click to expand...

Try to use 3 minutes of your live and watch this video from 9' minute and 3 minutes forwards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kePDAAEZ_s

You understand what I mean with RR, - and opposite in the opposite direction (look at the green arrow) ...

agal.jpg


Now first watch the 3 minutes of the Video and first then continue to read below;

Holy fanatic omniscience arrogant intolerant mass brain washed orthodox scientists say it is not possible that galaxies can come apart, - because they fully believe in the holy mass brainwashed fanatic dark matter and that the galaxies are full of such brainwashed STUFF (Haleluja / Amen).

RR is a fact.
RR is the cause of galaxies can break apart >

AND THIS IS WHAT THE FEW NOT MASS BRAINWASHED SCIENTIST AT THE VIDEO HAVE OBSERVED.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kePDAAEZ_s
 
Last edited:
Bjarne said:
...
Holy fanatic omniscience arrogant intolerant mass brain washed orthodox scientists ...
Click to expand...

If it wasn't for them, you would have no words to play with or stuff to bombard with your unsubstantiated childish ignorant rubbish.

If there were no scientists, no science, no layman science books or youtube etc, you would have absolutely nothing.
You have to completely lean on others, you appear too dumb to produce any hint of science or meaningful ideas on your own.

The clearest image you present of yourself Bjarne, is one of a clown with a cow fetish, stating that his unsubstantiated ignorant layman's rants are a fact.
Bjarne said:
...
RR is a fact.
...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Daylightstar said:
If it wasn't for them, you would have no words to play with or stuff to bombard with your unsubstantiated childish ignorant rubbish.

If there were no scientists, no science, no layman science books or youtube etc, you would have absolutely nothing.
You have to completely lean on others, you appear too dumb to produce any hint of science or meaningful ideas on your own.


The clearest image you present of yourself Bjarne, is one of a clown with a cow fetish, stating that his unsubstantiated ignorant layman's rants are a fact.
Click to expand...

Don't read all this black or white
I am not criticizing anyone personally, or those that only take BigBang, Dark Matter (etc..) for what it really is, which mean speculation, and are willing to admit this as well as open minded for other suggestions.

I am criticizing; that speculation in too many big cases occupied EVERYTHING and that the brain washed majority don't want to allow any opposition of any kind, (without flattening, humiliating and discriminate such minority) on all levels...

I am ONLY criticizing and humiliate the "moment" when speculation becomes hardcore fanatic religious mass-brainwash, and this is in fact what happens.

Doesn’t matter who is doing so and who is supporting such, I will attack.
This is not childness , this is necessary.

Somewhere these loads of fanaticism must come to an end.

I want science back to what it once was, before fanatic intolerant brainwashed religion went completely mad.
 
Bjarne said:
...
I want science back to what it once was, before fanatic intolerant brainwashed religion went completely mad.
Click to expand...

You mean, before any science was really known. Then your childish ignorant rants would have been less transparent and would have generated less criticism directed straight at you.

Unfortunately for you, your wish will not come true. No one cares what a clown with a cow fetish thinks about science, as it's inconsequential.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom