Science The Big Bang Theory Has Been Debunked?

Source (Archive)

Science appreciators around the world have been pleased with the new images being produced by the James Webb Space Telescope. This new highly advanced telescope has showcased images of the stairways that no one has ever seen before. While the public has been transfixed by how many new galaxies, stars, and more have been shown, it has caused a panic among astronomers and cosmologist communities. One of the growing concerns for these new images is that it has begun to produce papers that might be indirectly stating that the Big Bang Theory has been debunked, which would be massively heartbreaking for many people.

Many scientists have been studying these new images and determining evidence that has stood for many years. The big bang theory essentially states that the universe began some 14 billion years ago in an incredibly hot and dense state that has been expanding ever since. However, the characteristics of the galaxies that are furthest away should be huge and contain a “red shirt” to their light. What the James Webb Telescope has discovered is that those galaxies are the complete opposite. An astronomer at the University of Kansas in Lawrence, Alison Patrick, spoke about this new evidence with great panic. According to Patrick, “Right now I find myself lying awake at three in the morning and wondering if everything I've done is wrong.”

The new evidence would debunk the Big Bang Theory in a big way, as the initial idea is the universe exploded into existence and began to expand. In fact, it should be ever-expanding. But the new galaxies found are said to be older than when the Big Bang was said to have initially occurred. The young stars in those far galaxies should be hot and blue in color, as most young stars are. However, the stars being discovered are all cooler and reddish in color, indicating they are older than when the Big Bang would have occurred. Naturally, these new findings would have a massive impact on the scientific community. The Big Bang Theory being debunked would result in years of research being useless, in a sense. More importantly, the religious community that has believed that a singular god created the universe and accompanying stars would have some much better ground to stand on.

The Big Bang Theory was initially devised in 1931. Should it be debunked, it would cause scientists to rethink their entire careers. The astronomer that voiced her panic is just one of the many people that would likely lose sleep over such a massive discovery. The scientific community might continue to be in an uproar when more galaxies are discovered by the James Webb Space Telescope.

Science uses hypotheses and theories to determine and test anything in the known universe. However, years of research and data might be deemed wrong should the Big Bang Theory truly be debunked. If it is debunked, it might cause an existential crisis for astronomers, cosmologists, and regular people. Those who have rejected the idea of God, but adopted the Big Bang, would then have to ask themselves: “where did all these galaxies come from?”
 
How does this give evidence that a wizard poofed it all into existence?
Something coming into existence at a certain point in time is evidence that it was poofed into existence. (Theologians and philosophers might say "had an efficient cause.") If the evidence shows it is eternal, no poofing.

What's wrong with saying we just don't know yet?
Western thought for a few thousand years has had ideas about cause and effect that require a reason for everything to happen. Even things that are random like the decay of particles have physical laws or theories describing the probability of that event happening, and those laws seem to be always true. There's no "for no reason."
 
More importantly, the religious community that has believed that a singular god created the universe and accompanying stars would have some much better ground to stand on.

The Big Bang Theory was initially devised in 1931.
Another science “lover” who doesn’t know that TBBT was posited by a Catholic Priest. He was severely mocked by his atheistic contemporaries, who preferred to believe in an eternal universe. An eternal universe is logically consistent with no creator God. The Big Bang theory is logically consistent with a creator God. It’s a great irony of the modern age that the The Big Bang is now often cited as an alternative to the creator God.
What's wrong with saying we just don't know yet?
That’s not an answer to “why is nothing spontaneously appearing for no reason considered more logical than saying it was spontaneously created by a creator God?”
 
This article is garbage. The author should be deeply ashamed.

This has 'caused panic' amongst astronomers? Bullshit. Far away galaxies exhibit a "red shirt"? SHIFT! It's a red SHIFT! And what does author mean about it is supposed to be the opposite. Well clearly they would mean blue-shifting but they don't know what that is as evidenced by them later saying that the stars in the furthest galaxies are supposed to be blue because they're young / old? I don't get it. I think they are mixing in blue-shifting, i.e. the galaxies are moving towards us.

This is crazy. As someone who liked the Steady State idea with no evidence and no deep scientific background just because I found it aesthetically pleasing, well, great. But I wouldn't trust this article to tell me squat.
 
It seems like the scientific researchers I've met would be pretty excited about this discovery. Disproving an old theory by accident is as monumental as proving a new theory, especially for something as foundational to a field of science as the origin of the universe. I doubt it's causing anyone to jump on creationism, but it could drastically change the way we think about the universe. They'll probably have to make a new Cosmos series, at least.

The people acting like this is a bad thing aren't into science for their curiosity of nature. They get into it because they hate to be proven wrong and math is confusing. It gives shallow people something simple they can latch onto that will probably not be disproven in their lifetime, in turn, making their other retarded arguments have some sort of credence. The IFL Science! crowd and people with "We believe in science in this household" signs in their front yard fall into this category.
 
It seems like the scientific researchers I've met would be pretty excited about this discovery. Disproving an old theory by accident is as monumental as proving a new theory, especially for something as foundational to a field of science as the origin of the universe. I doubt it's causing anyone to jump on creationism, but it could drastically change the way we think about the universe. They'll probably have to make a new Cosmos series, at least.

The people acting like this is a bad thing aren't into science for their curiosity of nature. They get into it because they hate to be proven wrong and math is confusing. It gives shallow people something simple they can latch onto that will probably not be disproven in their lifetime, in turn, making their other retarded arguments have some sort of credence. The IFL Science! crowd and people with "We believe in science in this household" signs in their front yard fall into this category.
The clue is at the beginning of the article where it uses the term "Science appreciators". Strong chance article author just sees Science as a thing for his camp against "Science deniers".

The universe is actually just the result of one giant coomsplosion by Cthulu.
Cthulhu was merely an Old One. Azathoth is the closest to God in the Lovercraftian mythos. Azathoth is the blind chaos at the centre of all things. Nyalathotep is his priest.

On the scale of abomnable power. Big C is more on the planetary scale.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo