Let’s start with a mundane case. About a century ago, cosmologists began to realize that we can’t explain the motions of galaxies unless we assume that a certain amount of unknown matter exists that we cannot yet observe with telescopes. Scientists called this “dark matter.” This is a bold claim that requires extraordinary evidence. Still, the indirect evidence is mounting and most cosmologists now believe that dark matter exists. To the extent that non-scientists think about this issue at all, we tend to defer to experts in the field and move on with our lives.
But the article’s author’s mundane case is one of the most egregious examples of what he is describing. There literally is no evidence for "dark matter" or it’s later required "dark energy" yet cosmologists who proffer alternative cosmological hypotheses that do not require these mythical unseen and unfindable creations of the accepted orthodox cosmological model, AND actually explain observed astronomical phenomena, but also predict future discoveries that continually astound, shock, and surprise the orthodox cosmologists when they are discovered, are routinely denied publication, telescope time, tenure, and even ridiculed by those same orthodox cosmologists who must invoke magical fudge factors such as unseen "dark matter" and "dark matter" into their formulas to get their math to work! Yet these other cosmologists can demonstrate their theories in a laboratory, replicating in the microcosm what is seen in the macrocosm, and show that it is infinitely scalable, merely by increasing power. The orthodox cosmologists can demonstrate nothing except failure after failure in what they have predicted will be discovered.
For example, when NASA rammed a y40 pound chunk of copper in to Comet Tempel 1 back in 2005, the Electric Plasma Universe Cosmologists made 19 specific predictions of what would happen which orthodox cosmologists thought were highly ridiculous and amusing. Among them was that Tempel 1 would be rock, not a dirty snowball, there wtould be little to no water, there would be a huge discharge of electrical charge just before the impact. . . these and all the rest proved to be absolutely correct, surprises get the orthodox physicists, astronomers, and cosmologists whose predictions all were wrong.
Similarly, last year, the soft landing of the European Space Agency’s Rosetta probe’s Philae lander touched down on Comet 67P/ churyumov’Garasimenko bounced Seven times instead of anchoring into an expected soft snowball ice surface when, because they refused to listen to the alternative Electric Plasma Universe Cosmologist’s theories of how comets work, they encountered a CHARGED, dry-as-bone solid ROCK comet, without an iota of ice!
In fact, in every encounter we’ve now had with comets, and we’ve had seven so far, we’ve found no I’ve, just dry rocks that look indistinguishable from asteroids we’ve had close encounters with. Yet the orthodox cosmologists are so wedded to their gravity driven model of the Universe they are still spouting the completely falsified line that comets are dirty snowballs that somehow turn to steam as they get closer to the sun to create their comas and and super-powered jets tails reaching millions of miles into space when they warm up to only -140° C below zero. Right, sure. — Electric Universe Ping
If you want on or off the Electric Universe Ping List, Freepmail me.