NASA recently celebrated its latest Big Reveal, featuring the first-ever stunning images produced by its new James Webb Space Telescope. Mainstream astronomers and cosmologists? Not so much. It’s not that the pictures aren’t awe-inspiring. They are. It’s that they reveal the Big Bang to be just another Flat Earth theory.
There’s a small, but significant, community of scientists that have been rubbishing the Big Bang concept for decades. Distinguished scientists like Sir Fred Hoyle, Chandra Wickramasinghe, Paul LaViolette and others (although they differ on alternative cosmologies) have been saying for years that the Big Bang was the wrong interpretation of the “red shift” seen in distant starlight.
It took an 8-year battle with referees of numerous peer-reviewed journals before Paul LaViolette’s study disproving the Big Bang theory was finally published in the leading journal, Astrophysical Journal, in 1986. LaViolette showed the data better fit the “tired-light” model for the red shift. You probably never heard.
One of the best ways to become known (and funded) in the scientific community is to produce research that confirms existing theories like the Big Bang. One of the best ways to get shunned and ignored (not funded) is to produce research that disproves existing theories. You know, no one likes to be proved wrong, especially when one’s entire body of work (resume) turns out to be a monumental mistake. Oh, the horror!
“Right now I find myself lying awake at three in the morning and wondering if everything I’ve done is wrong,” said Alison Kirkpatrick, a University of Kansas astronomer, about the implications of the JWST images.
According to Eric Lerner, author of The Big Bang Never Happened, the theory is beyond fatally flawed. “Based on the published literature, right now the Big Bang makes 16 wrong predictions and only one right one—the abundance of deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen.”
The new images are only the latest nail in the coffin for this institutionalized idea. “According to Big Bang theory, the most distant galaxies in the JWST images are seen as they were only 400-500 million years after the origin of the universe. Yet already some of the galaxies have shown stellar populations that are over a billion years old,” said Eric Lerner.
Along similar lines, Paul LaViolette pointed to a JWST image with a fully formed galaxy only 233 million years after the Big Bang. According to the theory, plasma wouldn’t be cool enough to form stars and galaxies until 450 million years after the unimaginable blast. This means that the stars in this Galaxy must’ve started forming 500 million years before the Big Bang happened.
LaViolette’s critics say the tired light model violates the First Law of Thermodynamics, but as LaViolette counters, the Big Bang itself is the biggest violation of the First Law imaginable.
So, human nature being what it is, the people in charge (the old guys in power) simply deny that the new data contradicts their life’s work and continue on as if their mere pronunciations are enough to carry the day.
It’s pure Trumpism in science- just say your theory is correct and the truth be damned.
“No, James Webb Did Not Disprove the Big Bang,” was one such article posted at Big Think.com that acknowledged that the data didn’t match Big Bang predictions, but pooh-poohed it as a trivial matter that’ll get worked out in the long run given how well-established the Big Bang theory is- period. Full stop.
Yeah, it’ll get worked out alright- just like it got worked out before by inventing things like Dark Matter and Dark Energy when previous observations didn’t match the theory. (Still no evidence of these phenomena despite decades of searching. How many more epicycles do we need Ptolemy?!!)
As Yogi Berra once said, It’s like déjà vu all over again. Just a couple years ago, Chandra Wickramasinghe and his team published data showing that Covid-19 virus came from outside the Earth. The mainstream response was creepily similar. “No, the Coronavirus didn’t come from outer space,” was the headline at space.com. Nevermind the evidence.
Both instances are examples of what I call Paradigm Protectionism, which is the defense of a mainstream scientific theory regardless of the evidence. With Covid-19, the foundational mainstream theory ultimately at risk is called Abiogenesis, the assumption that life on Earth began in the primordial oceans billions of years ago when inanimate matter somehow became animate (no one knows how).
According to cosmologist Chandra Wickramasinghe, there isn’t a shred of evidence in support of Abiogenesis despite all efforts to prove the theory, while, at the same time, there is a growing body of evidence, including the proverbial smoking gun, for Panspermia, the theory that life is ubiquitous in the Universe; that it spreads between the stars inside meteors and comets, among other things, raining life in the form of viruses and other microorganisms on planets like Earth.
So mainstream science has fallen into a quagmire once again. Despite the enlightenment of a few centuries ago, heliocentrism, Darwinism, etc., most scientists still suffer from a geocentric hangover, assuming that life must’ve arisen through natural processes here on Earth (similar to evolution) as if Earth was still central to the story of life in the Universe. The evidence says it isn’t, but too many egos, identities, careers, etc., are invested in the old, “dead-man-walking” paradigm…
The UFO cover-up is the ultimate expression of paradigm protectionism.