the big bang never happened

[Guest guest]

this is a good site to explain the school of thought

started by nobel laureate Hannes Alfven

 

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/

 

you will learn that the big bang has been completely discredited for some time now,kept alive by those whose careers and dogma are at stake(the big bang theory was originated by a catholic priest).

 

you will learn that black hole's are not quantum singularities,they are not collapsed stars at all.

they are something completely different.

 

This school of cosmology is called 'plasma cosmology',

and it has consistently disproven all establishment

theories cooked up by the supporters of the big bang(catholic institutions,jewish instittions)

to prop up their crumbling edifice of disinformation.

 

the links at the site provide more info.

[Gauracandra]

Personally I’ve never had a problem with the Big Bang theory when seen in light of Vedic thought. The entire process of creation and destruction and creation yet again seems to me to be fairly scientific. If there is a big bang that begins with an explosion, couldn’t there be a collapse that annihilates the universal shell into destruction?

[Guest guest]

 

whether you have a problem with it or not,is besides the point.

The science behind it is completely and unequivocally

discredited.

 

It survives due to the effort of those who have staked their careers on it's propagation and it's ancillary

speculative theories.

 

Also christian and jewish institutions believe that the

big bang theory somehow validates their biblical theory

of how the universe came to be.

 

The vedic conception is not to be taken literally,

are there really oceans of milk,etc. ?

 

No ,these concepts are metaphor for a higher understanding.

 

You must understand the foolishness of the big bang to

really appreciate how unscientific and unlikely

it is.

 

They believe that 14 billion years ago all matter in this universe today,including time and space ,were somehow

existing in a single dot , of what size they debate over, then all of a sudden this dot somehow expanded

or exploded at an almost infinite speed ,time ,space,

and matter expanded together to create this universe.

 

What caused this dot,is ignored as a future

discovery,and what existed around this dot is

to them nothingness,which of course is illogical.

 

To them logic is thrown out the window,science is replaced

with speculation based on faulty theories ,then more speculation based on the previous speculations.

 

The plasma cosmologists have consistently shown everything

that is accepted as fact by the establishment asstrophysicists to be nothing more then pie in the sky.

 

[karthik_v]

Shiva,

 

While I agree that there are several unexplained components in the Big Bang theory, such as the missing mass, it is not correct that it stands discredited. It is still a viable model and the most pursued one. I am also very skeptical of ascribing conspiracy theory to everything. If Stephen Hawking changes his stance, on the strength of new evidences, do you think his career would be at stake?

 

The Creation hymns of the Rk veda describe creation of the universe in very much the same way the Big Bang postulating physicists understand today. There is hardly any need for a Hindu to oppose Big bang on religious grounds.

 

A believer's faith doesn't get shaken just because the Big bang theory is proven to be correct, for his faith isn't dependent on empirical evidences. A believer can very well argue that Big bang at best only explains the process of material creation, which itself should have received a spiritual impetus. So, for him, Vishnu as the Supreme creator is still relevant.

 

I am not discouraging you from posting such thoughts which aren't mainstream. Actually, scientific thinking demands that we evaluate every thought without affiliations. I haven't yet gone through the links you have provided, though.

[Guest guest]

The big bang doesn't accept the concept of infinity,

which by the way has to exist,anything else is so illogical (if infinity doesn't exist when you get to the end of the universe what stops you ? a wall ?) and

unscientific as to be proof of a conspiracy.

 

And in fact there is.

The big bang theory was originated by a catholic priest

in charge og the vaticans science section, his goal was to put the idea of the catholic concept of creation(nothingness,then all of a sudden the universe) as a scientific fact.

 

The details of the history of the big bang theory ,it's inception,variation,rejection and finally acceptance

can be found in the book "the big bang never happenned",

befor you make a statement like there is no conspiracy

educate yourself about the topic.

 

The vedic concept is the same as the plasma cosmologists,not the big bang theorists.

 

The vedic concept is that there is no beginning,there is no end,that is also the plasma concept.

Anything else is foolish to the extreme,and shows just how foolishness and loss of intelligence affects those under the material illusion,Maya.

 

The basic concepts of the big bang theory and all of the ancillary corrections made to it every time scientific

proofs make it impossible(i.e. creating imaginary entities

to solve the problem) are based on pushing biblical creationism.

 

The massive amount of proof showing plasma cosmology to be absolutely correct, compared to absolutely zero proof

for the big bang is there for all to see.

 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make im drink

[Guest guest]

i just jumped on this page and i'm a philosophy and psychology major in chattanooga TN, and let me tell you dude, you really have little to no idea what you're talking about. The Big Bang theory is the best answer we have right now that fits with the modern scientific paradigm, you're conspiracy theories are interesting, but not true. And yes, it just so happens that infinity is completely illogical. For more accurate information onthis subject you can view this web page:

 

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/craig-smith0.html

 

it has a debate listed on it over the creation of the universe by two leading philosophers in this area.

[Guest guest]

 

Well your opinion is based on what you think you "know",

Reality is by definition not based on what anyone

thinks they know.

 

So to insist that a theory about the origins

and make up of the universe is correct based solely

on what you think,well that is something that

you might hear about in your psychology class.

 

I take a different position,having studied these

 

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/galaxies.htm

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/universe.html

 

and other sources.

 

here is something that you as a student of

the mind will appreciate.

 

http://www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/NSC_111/TenMyths.html

 

http://www.bluffton.edu/~bergerd/NSC_111/science1.html

 

[Guest guest]

shiva, you believe some things by faith in krsna, prabhupada and so on, do not attempt to talk about science if you don't know

[Guest guest]

Hah ! aren't all the members in this forum as mature ? Perhaps it is your faith which gives you this tolerance.

[Guest guest]

 

"shiva, you believe some things by faith in krsna, prabhupada and so on, do not attempt to talk about science if you don't know"

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Correct! Thanks for reminding Shiva. He is hyper with other's idea.