I have to admit that is the most impressively open-minded discussion of the CMB by a mainstream scientist I have yet encountered. It was especially gratifying to see him point out the circular reasoning that lies at the heart of how cosmological data is typically interpreted. He also managed to discuss plasma issues without referring to “electric universe nuts”.
The end of the Expanding Universe as the only allowed cosmological framework for interpreting cosmological data is probably not quite at hand, but there does seem to be a growing body of dissidents within the cosmological community. Dissidents meaning cosmologists open to the possibility that the EU framework might be wrong. That alone would be a major advance in turning modern cosmology from a belief system into a science.
The funniest comment was O’Dowd saying he found the descriptive term ad hoc to be judgmental.
… which makes me suspect O’Dowd doesn’t know what ad hoc means.
Is The Big Bang Theory Controlling How We See CMBR Data? https://youtu.be/Ku7mjp25Uq0
I have to admit that is the most impressively open-minded discussion of the CMB by a mainstream scientist I have yet encountered. It was especially gratifying to see him point out the circular reasoning that lies at the heart of how cosmological data is typically interpreted. He also managed to discuss plasma issues without referring to “electric universe nuts”.
The end of the Expanding Universe as the only allowed cosmological framework for interpreting cosmological data is probably not quite at hand, but there does seem to be a growing body of dissidents within the cosmological community. Dissidents meaning cosmologists open to the possibility that the EU framework might be wrong. That alone would be a major advance in turning modern cosmology from a belief system into a science.