Two Australian scientists, Dr Robin Warren and Dr Barry Marshall won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 2005 for their pioneering cure of peptic ulcers. What is most revealing about ‘established science’ is that these gifted and dedicated doctors had made this discovery in 1982. Establish orthodoxy moves at a snail’s pace when confronted with unorthodoxy.
The ‘settled science’ of peptic ulcers for decades was based on gastric samplings that showed an acidic or lower pH than normal. This indicated that the patient obviously had a dietary imbalance, best cured by alkaline tinctures, or curiously enough, dairy products which were themselves acidic. It is inexplicable that the science community clung to this false premise for so long.
What Warren/Marshall research was able to show was that the bacterium, H. Pylori, was the cause of the ulcer and the increased acid was from the bacteria’s waste. Millions suffered needlessly for decades while ‘experts’ dithered and obstructed this important medical breakthrough.
The established experts were unable to accept the overwhelming evidence of successful treatment based on this theory. To prove his findings, the courageous Dr Marshall infected himself with H. Pylori and then cured himself with his own antibiotic treatment. It is the determined skeptic that delivers the hope and promise of science to humanity.
Given the low level of the lay public’s understanding of science, it is a real challenge to provide meaningful debate to the established leadership and not over-reach the populace. Along with the restraints of article brevity, all concepts must be simplified and each article self supporting. This author’s articles on climate, and now cosmology, are best viewed as a lecture series and most properly viewed in context with their companion articles.
In “Big Bang Rebuttal” there was mention of two possible explanations for the apparent acceleration of most objects in the Universe, which is claimed to increase with distance.
The established hypothesis is that this is a Doppler shift from movement directly away from the observer, in this case, Earthlings. My argument was that this could just as well be ‘angular acceleration’ with no relative movement required.
‘Angular acceleration’ and ‘Doppler shift’ are both human constructs which do answer fundamental principles that are readily observable. Gastric pH and micro-organisms are both readily observable principles of medicine. It is a human choice to treat the symptom or the underlying disease.
In the ‘Rebuttal’ there was mention of the all dots on the surface of a balloon moving apart during inflation as an analogy for the expanding universe hypothesis. I mentioned that there should be a visible edge with a distinct boundary line. This was countered by some saying, “the Milky Way is in the CENTER of the balloon and that is why you cannot see the edge”.
To borrow a quote from the church lady on Saturday Night Live, we must now be forced to believe that the Milky Way is the center of the observed Universe. We see Galaxies over 13 billion light years away in every direction. To believe in the Big Bang we must have nine dimensions, multi-verses, anti-matter, dark matter and a ‘vacuum energy’ which is invisible, but far greater than gravity. And by happy coincidence, out of the 80 billion observable Galaxies, we happened to be in the VERY CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.
The calculated velocities for our distant neighbor Galaxies is thousands of kilometers per second and predicted as accelerating even faster. In contrast, the ‘Rebuttal’ hypothesis could allow stationary Galaxies with the curved path of travel allowing for the observed Doppler shift. The light is moving so the source can be freed from unrealistic movements. The greater light travel distance would require more bending of the light rays and thus a greater spectrum shift, but from angular acceleration and not Doppler.
This concept is not unlike the operating theory on Black Holes where light and matter are drawn in a spiral into an event horizon. It could be that human telescopes, human eyes and human conscious form another type of event horizon. All of life may be a universal struggle for matter, for light, for understanding.
Philosophic diatribes on the edge of the universe may not seem germane to the average person. However, the ability of science to address and correct it’s failed orthodoxy, do have a profound effect on your daily life. The failed science of gastric chemistry caused needless suffering for millions of innocent victims. Enacting carbon taxes based on failed climate science will cause needless suffering for BILLIONS of innocent victims.
Many have questioned what qualifies this author, a mere engineer, to question authority. I’m glad that you asked. “Engineering is applied science” and as such requires science with the extra caveats that it must be correct, safe and practical. Formal training for this task required as much Physics and a Physics major, as much Chemistry as a Chemistry major and as much Math as a Math major. In fact, a scientist is an engineer that did not want to go to school for an extra year.
Decades of formal science education is then followed by decades of technical productivity. To remain viable, an engineering professional must stay informed on the current scientific debates. All new information is processed thru an established scientific prism. Defects in the reasoning of all branches of science are readily apparent.
There are those among us that see both terrible and bountiful possibilities to humanity’s present condition. We see a universe of unbelievable complexity and improbable order. We are tugging on the psychological boot straps of our fellow humans, hoping to lift all so they may see these great dangers and possibilities. Humanity is suffering from ailments which the establishment bromides will never cure.
Origins of the universe or the number of angels who can dance on the head of a pin are fodder for philosophic fools. Humanity faces a very real problem with established science authorities who have abdicated their moral obligation for truth and evidence. This failure places all of humanity in peril.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement