Evidence Against the Big Bang

[Jefferson]

Evidence Against the Big Bang

This is the show from Tuesday, November 29th, 2016

SUMMARY:



* Available as a Christmas Gift: The long-awaited astronomy video RSR's Evidence Against the Big Bang, is finally here! If you enjoy Real Science Radio and would like to help keep the guys broadcasting and reaching more people, you just might love getting your own copy of this really fun and informative video. This big bang video is persuasive in the way that RSR is known for and so it will also make a fabulous Christmas present for creationists and non-creationists alike!

* In Quantities of 1, 4, and 10: Our full-length video has been described as a tour de force against the big bang theory! It's based on the top lines of evidence listed over at rsr.org/bb. Here are the formats and purchase options available:
- DVD or Blu-ray $34.99
- Download $29.99
- Christmas gift pricing 4 copies for $99.99
- Christmas pricing 10 copies for $199.99
This bulk pricing is available on our online store or by calling us at 1-800-8Enyart.

* 30-Day Moneyback Guarantee: And as we've done for 25 years on the air, BEL has a 30-day money back guarantee.

* If Money's Tight: If you can't afford our materials, just send a check for whatever you can afford, to Bob Enyart Live, PO Box 583, Arvada CO 80001, and we'll help cover the costs and get this video to you! Just make sure to give us your mailing address and indicate whether you would like the Blu-ray or DVD. Thanks!

After Real Science Radio's debate with Lawrence Krauss, a leading big bang proponent, we aired our list of peer-reviewed scientific evidence against the big bang and against the widely-held major features of the cosmological model founded on the theory. Welcome now to Real Science Radio's second airing of our List of Evidence Against the Big Bang! On today's radio show, hear the 10-second clip from Lawrence Krauss that got Bob Enyart and co-host Fred Williams all worked up. Theoretical physicist Dr. Krauss told RSR that, "all evidence overwhelmingly supports the big bang." So in response, we produced this list, which is the web's most concise and comprehensive catalog of evidence assessed by many scientists to be inconsistent with the expectations of a big bang origin. And we invite you to share this page with friends by posting this simple rsr.org/big-bang link, and to check out the amazing full list with references just below this summary...

* Summary of RSR's List of Evidence Against the Big Bang: For descriptions and links to journal references, see below.
- Mature galaxies exist where the BB predicts only infant galaxies (like the 13.4Bly distant GN-z11)
- An entire universe-worth of missing antimatter contradicts most fundamental BB prediction
- Observations show that spiral galaxies are the missing millions of years of BB predicted collisions
- Clusters of galaxies exist at great distances where the BB predicts they should not exist
- A trillion stars are missing an unimaginably massive quantity of heavy elements, a total of nine billion years worth
- Galaxy superclusters exist yet the BB predicts that gravity couldn't form them even in the alleged age of the cosmos
- A missing generation of the alleged billions of first stars that the failed search has implied simply never existed
- Missing uniform distribution of earth's radioactivity
- Solar system formation theory wrong too
- It is "philosophy", not science, that makes the big-bang claim that the universe has no center
- Amassing evidence suggests the universe may have a center
- Sun is missing nearly 100% of the spin that natural formation would impart
- The beloved supernova chemical evolution story for the formation of heavy elements is now widely rejected
- Missing uniform distribution of solar system isotopes
- Missing billions of years of additional clustering of nearby galaxies
- Surface brightness of the furthest galaxies, against a fundamental BB claim, is identical to that of the nearest galaxies
- Missing shadow of the big bang with the long-predicted "quieter" echo behind nearby galaxy clusters now disproved
- The CMB and other alleged confirmed big bang predictions (Google: big bang predictions. See that we're #1.)
- These "shouldn't exist" – a supermassive black hole, an iron-poor star, and a dusty galaxy – but they do
- Fine tuning and dozens of other MAJOR scientific observations and 1,000+ scientists doubting the big bang.

See the rest of this report updated at rsr.org/evidence-against-the-big-bang.

 

[gcthomas]

* Summary of RSR's List of Evidence Against the Big Bang: For descriptions and links to journal references, see below.

Let's see how gormless this list is …

- Mature galaxies exist where the BB predicts only infant galaxies (like the 13.4Bly distant GN-z11)

This galaxy has only grown to 1% of the mass of our own galaxy and has 25 times the rate of star production. Young, and forming stars rapidly, so it doesn't seem terribly mature to me.

- An entire universe-worth of missing antimatter contradicts most fundamental BB prediction

Fundamental prediction? Nah. Never was central, since there are several possible reasons for the absence, such as CP symmetry violation or the presence of an electric dipole in fundamental particles that would produce differential production or decay rates.

- Observations show that spiral galaxies are the missing millions of years of BB predicted collisions

Link?

- Clusters of galaxies exist at great distances where the BB predicts they should not exist

- A trillion stars are missing an unimaginably massive quantity of heavy elements, a total of nine billion years worth

This is evidence against one of several galaxy formation theories, not the BB.

- Galaxy superclusters exist yet the BB predicts that gravity couldn't form them even in the alleged age of the cosmos

This is evidence against one of several galaxy formation theories, not the BB. Solved by the more recent direct observation of dark matter around galaxies.

- A missing generation of the alleged billions of first stars that the failed search has implied simply never existed

Try here: Pop III stars discovered. Evidence for PopIII-like stellar populations in the most luminous Lyman-α emitters at the epoch of re-ionisation: spectroscopic confirmation

- Missing uniform distribution of earth's radioactivity

Brown's claim that 90% of the radioactive material of the Earth is in the continental crust is just a made up junk comment. It is just wrong. (Unless you have an actual source other than Brown?)

- Solar system formation theory wrong too

Nothing to do with the Big Bang, of course. And revisiting and improving theories that no longer explain all of the evidence is a good thing. YECs ought to try it, instead of trying to distort the evidence to fit their dogma.

- It is "philosophy", not science, that makes the big-bang claim that the universe has no center

Yup, but that is not actually evidence against the theory.

- Amassing evidence suggests the universe may have a center

Let us know when is has finally amassed to something … we'll wait.

- Sun is missing nearly 100% of the spin that natural formation would impart

You can't claim that as well as claim that the theory of the formation of the solar system is incomplete. Silly and inconsistent.

- The beloved supernova chemical evolution story for the formation of heavy elements is now widely rejected

You leave out the next sentence in the same paragraph of the popular source you relied on, which offers a solution to the problem. Don't you ever get tired of quote-mining?

- Missing uniform distribution of solar system isotopes

Nothing to do with the Big Bang theory.

- Missing billions of years of additional clustering of nearby galaxies

Hardly evidence of god-did-it, is it? Unless I have missed a critical passage of Genesis that describes galaxy clustering as observed.

- Missing shadow of the big bang with the long-predicted "quieter" echo behind nearby galaxy clusters now disproved

Nope. The defict was recorded in 2005, solved with an improved model in 2009, and written about by YECs years after. Does no-one do due dilligence here?
http://mnras.oxfordjournals.org/content/402/2/1179.full.pdf


What a poor list. I though that you'd have put together something recent and relevant, but it in only out of date quote-mines, misunderstandings, deliberate misrepresentations and lies. I am disappointed.

 

[User Name]

- It is "philosophy", not science, that makes the big-bang claim that the universe has no center

"[A] center just doesn't fit with what scientists have learned through decades of modern astronomy. The Big Bang is the name scientists give to the events that started the universe. Although the Big Bang is often described as a huge explosion, an explosion has a central point, such as a bomb or a spark. The Big Bang wasn't like that...The Big Bang happened everywhere at once. It's an expansion of space itself, not the expansion of things in space. That means everywhere in space is moving apart from everywhere else. This has been going on in the entire universe for almost 14 billion years."

-- http://spaceplace.nasa.gov/review/podcasts/transcripts/070523_universe.html

 

[6days]

The Big Bang is the name scientists give to the events that started the universe.

Its a model that seems increasingly dependent on hypothetical entities....Dark energy, black holes, dark matter, *dark particles, white holes... and even other universes.

Although the Big Bang is often described as a huge explosion

Other things secular cosmologists describe the Big Bang as a cold whoosh, or a...exponential expansion of the universe in some energetic vacuum-like state, or a...infinitesimally tiny little explosion, or a ..bounce inside a black hole, or a ....violent event in a pre-existing universe, or even that .... it might all be nothing more than a fantasy world of maths

As Jefferson said...the Big Bang is philosophy.

 

[gcthomas]

Its a model that seems increasingly dependent on hypothetical entities....Dark energy, black holes, dark matter, *dark particles, white holes... and even other universes.
Other things secular cosmologists describe the Big Bang as a cold whoosh, or a...exponential expansion of the universe in some energetic vacuum-like state, or a...infinitesimally tiny little explosion, or a ..bounce inside a black hole, or a ....violent event in a pre-existing universe, or even that .... it might all be nothing more than a fantasy world of maths

As Jefferson said...the Big Bang is philosophy.

I love it when anti-science YECs dismiss science because it relies on hypothetical entities.