Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

The Big Bang?

Posted Jan 4, '13 at 4:52am

handlerfan

handlerfan

194 posts

How is this an alternative to anything? . My alternative is that we know nothing about how things came to be, but we have the human mind realising where it is, assessing where it is, and coming to conclusions.

What about people like Penny who don't have the smarts to understand the Big Bang theory, Sheldon?

Science isn't just pulling things out of thin air. I suspect that a lot of things are pulled out of thin air to get a research grant.

 

Posted Jan 4, '13 at 5:25am

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,512 posts

Knight

How is this an alternative to anything? . My alternative is that we know nothing about how things came to be, but we have the human mind realising where it is, assessing where it is, and coming to conclusions.

Again it's not an alternative, it's a "we don't know"-statement. You just say we may not be right about the big bang, but don't propose some other model else instead.

Science isn't just pulling things out of thin air. I suspect that a lot of things are pulled out of thin air to get a research grant.

Of course you need to make good impression to get money for your research, and researchers are hardly to blame for this. Doesn't mean that all that comes out is hot air; peer-review sorts this out usually.
 

Posted Jan 4, '13 at 3:55pm

MageGrayWolf

MageGrayWolf

9,805 posts

Knight

Science isn't just pulling things out of thin air. I suspect that a lot of things are pulled out of thin air to get a research grant.


Yes there are people who try to falsify their claims but the scientific process does eventually weed this out. One step in this is as HahiHa pointed out the peer review process. Though beyond this we also have other scientists who will go and try to duplicate that person's results. Also as science progresses we will find and discard the parts that are shown to not fit.
 

Posted Jan 4, '13 at 6:00pm

partydevil

partydevil

5,289 posts

1 thing about peer reviews. it can sometimes take about 20 year befor the research is redone or even readed over by a other scientist. often when someone has a good name. people do not check their statements and letters.
last year 3 dutch people whit a phd. who had a very good name for over 15 year. were stripped of their phd title because they made up stuff and teached this to their students as fact.

 

Posted Jan 4, '13 at 6:13pm

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,512 posts

Knight

Submitting your paper to a journal in order to get it published automatically involves peer-review by several other scientists. At least nowadays, in most cases. But I think what you say is not completely wrong; having a fame bonus can get you much further.

They found not long ago a super massive black hole in a small galaxy that contradicts current models of black holes. If they have to adapt models of how galaxies form, maybe the big bang theory will have to be updated once more? Admittedly it would be boring if each new find would just agree with the models
Giant black hole in tiny galaxy confounds astronomers

 
Reply to The Big Bang?

You must be logged in to post a reply!