Why do you refuse to consider new evidence and advancements in science?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ingvar Astrand
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the perceived censorship of new scientific theories and evidence, particularly regarding a unified physics theory presented by Ingvar Astrand. Astrand questions why empirical discoveries that contradict the mainstream consensus are not allowed to be discussed openly. The response clarifies that his theories are not being censored but rather need to be presented in the appropriate forum for alternative theories. The importance of robust evidence and argumentation in challenging established scientific theories is emphasized, highlighting that mere assertions without supporting arguments do not warrant a response. The conversation underscores the need for constructive dialogue within established scientific frameworks.
Ingvar Astrand
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
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
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
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 https://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.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
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.
 
Last edited:

Thread 'Does it make sense to build new radio telescopes?'

TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
View full post »
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
View full post »

Thread 'Our Beautiful Universe - Photos and Videos'

This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
View full post »

Similar threads

Is Redshift Really Proof of Universe Expansion?
Replies
9
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top