The Holy Big Bang

[Ingvar Astrand]

To the mentor-censor

Why do you forbid research reports about empirical discoveries that by scientific derivations give other results than the conspired consensus?

Why do you not let your members discuss the science without censoring?

What I would like to tell more about is the unified physics that I have derived and got accepted and given lectures at conferences in universities in USA (Connecticut 2000) and Russia St.-Petersburg 2002 and Kazan 2003 (plenary-lecture), Paris UNESCO 2002 (poster-session).

Why do you try to stop the truth and the development of science?
You can do it here on your debatepage, but there are other ways for the true science. What you do is that you support lies and delays

Ingvar Astrand, Sweden
ingvar_astrand@hotmail.com

[Phobos]

Take a deep breath, Ingvar. Your ideas are not being censored.

You inserted your theory into a discussion about redshift with respect to the Big Bang model. As a general policy, if members wish to present their own theories, it is done in the Theory Development forum (http://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?s=&daysprune=1000&forumid=12). Your post is still there now awaiting further discussion. What happened was that I split out your post to create its own topic/thread (which worked fine) and keep the rest of that redshift topic here (which didn't work...I accidentally/unfortunately lost that bit...sorry, marcus, you posted from great info there).

And yes, Big Bang Theory has pride of place in this forum. Deservedly so. Discussions of alternative theories are welcome at Physics Forums in their proper place. If you fear that your ideas will be lost in the Theory Development forum, you can include a link to your topic in a relevant ongoing thread in this forum.

[russ_watters]

It takes more than conspiracy allegations to overturn an accepted scientific theory. We'd be happy to examine any evidence you might have. Indeed, it is only by withstanding such powerful challenges that a theory becomes so well accepted. Your other post however contained only assertions and no arguements, so there was nothing to respond to.