Atheists who love Science!

A group for science enthusiasts of all types -- professionals, amateurs, students, anybody who loves science.

Load Previous Comments
  • Pope Beanie

    It reminds me too much of the creationist agenda to discredit modern evolutionary science, by "teaching the controversy". Their list of supposedly respectable scientists that debunk evolution was easily countered with a much longer list known as Project Steve.

    Can you recommend any particular scientist or two on the Open Letter list for their credibility? So far, I see the majority of EU support coming from people (like Jeff Rense) who make a living by pushing pseudoscience, and pandering to an audience that distrusts conventional science as a rule of thumb.

    For those reasons, I have more confidence in scientists who don't claim that their opponenents just belong to some conspiratorial group, with ulterior motives... unless perhaps they're rediculously popular on one of those generally anti-mainstrean talk shows majoring in woo, e.g. fantasies about "parallel universes", etc.

  • Tom Sarbeck

           It reminds me too much of the creationist agenda....

    Think Ptolemy. His circular orbits needed hypothesized smaller circles upon his original circles.

    I don't know how many more hypothesized still smaller circles he added before Kepler(?), following Galileo, hypothesized elliptical orbits. We know whose hypotheses had observable evidence.

    Ptolemy had no such evidence and the Bangers are still looking for some.

    As for conspiracies, do as investigative reporters do: follow the trail of money.

    The money trail started during the Cold War when the USSR launched a man into earth orbit.

    America's leaders knew the same vehicle could put weapons into earth orbit, and the money started flowing. A big side benefit was the improvement of math and science education. In many states, teaching evolution was illegal and schools were still teaching Genesis.

  • Tom Sarbeck

          Can you recommend any particular scientist....

    Halton Arp, in Wikipedia:

    If the lines in the spectrum of the light from a star or galaxy appear at a lower frequency (shifted toward the red) than where they are observed in the spectrum of the Sun, we say this object exhibits 'positive redshift'.  The accepted explanation for this effect is that the object must be moving away from us.  This interpretation is drawn by analogy with the downward shift in the pitch of a train whistle as it passes through a railroad crossing and then speeds away from us.  The question is: Is recessional velocity the only thing that can produce a redshift, as modern astrophysicists presume?  It has become clear that the answer to that question is an emphatic NO!