Notices
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Open Letter About BBU

  1. #1 Open Letter About BBU 
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    This is a letter about the BBU promoting itself as a monopoly that I agree with.

    Please read it and sign it. URL given below:

    http://www.cosmologystatement.org/

    Thank you.

    NS


    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Interesting, impressive list of sign ons and get right to the point...


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Junior Lucifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Close to 290125001
    Posts
    223
    Signing a petition to favor a certain "science" is like try to win a fencing contest by proposing the other fence to play checkers. Either you can fence or you can't, and if you can't fence then fencing is not your business.

    If you can't get what is wrong with pushing science through a petition, any explanations on the topic will be useless...
    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” -Charles Darwin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Personally, I also do not like the idea and have apposed the same principles used for the global warming argument. However I read the document as a desire to see all theory regarding the Universe be explored with public funds, even if they do not conform to BBT. Unlike GW which as taken on a religious aspect, very few people actually CARE, if or how the universe began, other than the apparent NEED that it did begin.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Unlike GW which as taken on a religious aspect, very few people actually CARE, if or how the universe began, other than the apparent NEED that it did begin.
    Apparently somebody cares or thinks somebody else cares, else why the need for the petition.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Stand corrected...but remember I agree with the petition...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucifer
    Signing a petition to favor a certain "science" is like try to win a fencing contest by proposing the other fence to play checkers. Either you can fence or you can't, and if you can't fence then fencing is not your business.

    If you can't get what is wrong with pushing science through a petition, any explanations on the topic will be useless...
    The petition is not designed to favour a particular science. It is designed to identify, object to and counteract the institutionalised favouring of a particular science.

    If you can't get what is wrong with closing down avenues of research simply because they do not match current paradigms then any explanations on the topic will be useless.....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D. Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    969
    Wow. That has to be the shortest and fuzziest petition I've read in a long time.

    As much as I agree that science shouldn't be close-minded towards other angles of approach, I believe it is merit and fact that gain a viewpoint interest, not petition.

    The scientific community can be very stubborn, but presented with undeniable evidence of truth, and they (often) open up.

    With funds being limited, people have to target those funds on topics of study which have the most merit. Not that no other theory besides the current ones have worth, it's just that you can't fund them all.

    Simply signing a petition to say "other ideas should get funding" won't make it happen. There has to be a change of focus in the scientific community, away from the current lines of focus.

    That said, if people want a piece of paper that says the scientific community will acknowledge the existence of other ideas...whatever.

    If you're someone with a bunch of money and you can only give it to one research group, which are you going to give it to? The one that seems to be on the accepted path, or the one that so-far lacks wide acceptance?

    Well, it may be true that the underdog deserves a break...but unfortunately the folks with all the money don't play like that. They never have...probably never will.

    BTW...this petition was started in 2004...What happened with it?
    Wolf
    ---------------------------------------------------------
    "Be fair with others, but then keep after them until they're fair with you." Alan Alda
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolf
    If you're someone with a bunch of money and you can only give it to one research group, which are you going to give it to? The one that seems to be on the accepted path, or the one that so-far lacks wide acceptance?
    If you are smart you give some of it to those ideas which seem to have the greatest chance of being paradigm busters.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Freshman César's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Spain, Europe
    Posts
    61
    The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory.

    But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation.

    Without some kind of dark matter, unlike any that we have observed on Earth despite 20 years of experiments, big-bang theory makes contradictory predictions for the density of matter in the universe. Inflation requires a density 20 times larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory's explanation of the origin of the light elements. And without dark energy, the theory predicts that the universe is only about 8 billion years old, which is billions of years younger than the age of many stars in our galaxy.
    I had to stop at this point. This petition is passé! (It is dated May 2004)

    Starting with the isotropy of CBR: the axis of evil was discovered in 2005. Read this: http://space.newscientist.com/articl...c-concern.html

    Dark matter: 2006, NASA confirms its existence. Read this: http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2006...rk_Matter.html

    Dark energy: 1998! Read this: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/11/7/15/1

    Best regards,

    César
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    To All

    I posted this petition because my personal observations tell me that the BBU has more contrary evidence for its existence than the evidence for its support.
    I believe in a Copernicus or a Galileo rather than a power structure that has a tendency to promote its own beliefs rather than promote a debate with real evidence.

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Lucifer
    Signing a petition to favor a certain "science" is like try to win a fencing contest by proposing the other fence to play checkers. Either you can fence or you can't, and if you can't fence then fencing is not your business.

    If you can't get what is wrong with pushing science through a petition, any explanations on the topic will be useless...
    It's politics that they're trying to oppose, more than anything. And, yes, you do oppose politics with politics.

    Trying to break down the BBU with actual scientific argument would be as futile as trying to win a fencing match by trying to get them to play checkers.

    The BBU doesn't survive on the basis of the science. It survives on the basis of the fact it's proponents will make whatever arguments they have to in order to keep the idea afloat, even if it requires reason to stand on its ear. They do this because they are personally invested in it turning out to be true. A lot of careers have been made on this theory.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    They do this because they are personally invested in it turning out to be true. A lot of careers have been made on this theory.
    How do you know their motives?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Junior Lucifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Close to 290125001
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    They do this because they are personally invested in it turning out to be true. A lot of careers have been made on this theory.
    How do you know their motives?
    He's been gifted with clairvoyance. 8)
    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” -Charles Darwin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Ok, a poltician makes an unpopular decision. You later find out a special interest paid him/her a lot of money to make it. He/she, of course, will claim that they were going to make the decision that way anyway, and the bribe was just a fortunate coincidence.


    A person can claim any motive they want in any situation, and you'll never know absolutely for sure whether the claim is true or not, but 99.999999% of the time, people do what is in their own best interest, or in the interest of their ego/self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Detroit Metropolitan area
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax
    Ok, a poltician makes an unpopular decision. You later find out a special interest paid him/her a lot of money to make it. He/she, of course, will claim that they were going to make the decision that way anyway, and the bribe was just a fortunate coincidence.


    A person can claim any motive they want in any situation, and you'll never know absolutely for sure whether the claim is true or not, but 99.999999% of the time, people do what is in their own best interest, or in the interest of their ego/self-esteem.
    I agree.

    If ever the BBU is finally laid to rest, their will be a lot of red faces.

    NS
    Real science is objective, not subjective
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •