But...the Big Bang Theory is fact...Right? But....the telescope may be saying no? And that is for climate people too....

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Apparently, the OP doesn't understand the difference between "theory" and "fact"......................

Theory is what scientists THINK may be true based on the evidence collected thus far, but they don't actually know.

Fact is something that is true and has been verified to be so based on scientific discovery and the ability for that discovery to be repeated with the same result.

And, trying to paint it as true by referencing a television sitcom (which is anything BUT fact) is truly ridiculous.

So, AGW is nothing but a non-disprovable theory, meaning the scientific method cannot be applied and therefore nothing but bullshit?

I agree

 

[B. Kidd]

The great thing about science is that science almost always proves science was wrong.

Post of the day!!

 

[Burgermeister]

So.......as those of us who do not believe in the man made global warming cult keep telling you......you don't know what you are talking about when you demand we give up our lives to your cult of global warming emotion.....

How does this apply to the thread title?

Remember the Big Bang Theory....they named a t.v. show after it after all........this was the way everything came to be....a big explosion (the bang part of the Big Bang Theory) that made everything that exists........no, don't mention God here, the scientists today, unlike in the past, don't like to talk about God........

But.....ummmm.....errrrr......that shiny, new, expensive telescope that was all the rage 10 seconds ago? Is causing some heartburn and perhaps buyers remorse....

And if a theory like the "Big Bang Theory," is looking a teeny, tiny bit different today, because of that telescope....you'all need to stop telling us you know everything about our climate with the barest of knowledge of what is going on....

Why do the JWST’s images inspire panic among cosmologists? And what theory’s predictions are they contradicting? The papers don’t actually say. The truth that these papers don’t report is that the hypothesis that the JWST’s images are blatantly and repeatedly contradicting is the Big Bang Hypothesis that the universe began 14 billion years ago in an incredibly hot, dense state and has been expanding ever since.
-----------
I’m not going to pretend that I have the scientific mental horsepower to understand the mechanics behind all of this, but science journals are quoting people who certainly should be able to understand it. If the universe has been expanding since its inception 14 billion years ago, the constellations the furthest away from us should appear huge and have a certain amount of “red shift” in their light. But what Webb is showing us is almost exactly the opposite.

That’s a problem for the big bang theory. If the universe was born in a monumental blast with everything traveling outward at incredible speed, all of that matter should still be traveling and expanding. But it doesn’t appear to be. In fact, the universe might not really be expanding at all. And if it’s not expanding, then it probably didn’t come from a massive explosion at a single point in the void. If that’s the case… where did all of this stuff come from?

There are more issues to deal with. The most distant galaxies Webb has located are being seen when they were as little as 400 million years old, as determined by when the big bang is assumed to have happened. That means their stars should all still be hot and blue in color as all young stars are. But many of them are cooler and reddish in color, signifying that they should be at least a billion years old.

Astronomers looking at Webb: What if the Big Bang didn't happen?

hotair.com

Some big problems with that theory. Will be interesting to see if they cling to it.

 

[Burgermeister]

So, AGW is nothing but a non-disprovable theory, meaning the scientific method cannot be applied and therefore nothing but bullshit?

I agree

I'd categorize it as a hypothesis that always fails. In real science, that bs would have been abandoned decades ago. Remember their answer to the global warming "pause" - the heat went and hid at the bottom of the ocean for 18 years. Science.

 

[Independentthinker]

Using the best available information is always the best way to make decisions. What do you propose that would be better?

Well, when you know that current available information will most likely be proven wrong then you are relying on wrong information to make your decisions. We certainly saw that all through the pandemic, many times over.

 

[2aguy]

Doesn't matter. If new valid information is presented showing prier beliefs to be wrong, the entire scientific community will change it's beliefs. That's how it works.

Yeah......now post that again without breaking into laughter....

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Ever heard of a tachyon? Those move faster than the speed of light.

Yes. Those THEORETICAL particles

 

[Burgermeister]

Scientific beliefs reflect what we believe to be the truth based on the best information we have at the time. With the addition of new "better" information, those beliefs are reevaluated in order to more accurately reflect the new, better information. As I said before, the slow witted often have a hard time understanding that that is a good thing.

I agree. Global warmists are slow-witted.