“There is No Alternative to the Big Bang Cosmology” – a closed-minded argument of Big Bang Supporters

Supporters of Big Bang Cosmology often come up with this argument. Recently, a Philosopher of Science, Dr. Bjørn Ekeberg (PhD) published a Philosophic themed book from the platform of a reputed University that pointed out some problems of Big Bang Cosmology.

The first response from the Big Bang Supporters that he faced was this title argument that “There is No Alternative to Big Bang Cosmology”.

The background of this argument is that present day science has settled in a “peer review” process. Now forget good old day’s open minded science where scientific research or experimental results were science. Now “what has been published” is science.

This is a closed process. New ‘scientist’ is required to cite recent publications. In this process only peer reviewed stuff is cited … may be it is hard requirement to cite only proper peer reviewed stuff.

The result is that for the modern ‘scientist’, science only exists in peer reviewed journals and any individual’s ideas are not science unless they are published in peer reviewed journal.

See that it is closed process and obviously it gives rise to close mindedness.

Contempt of ‘scientists’ against open mindedness is clear in their beloved Dunning and Kruger Effect. To any outside researcher, they straight away call “suffering from DK effect”.

Any outsider researcher has false confidence that he has found something in science. It is not possible that any outsider may find scientific fact. If any individual thinks so, he must be suffering from DK effect.

However, following is the reality of DK effect:

Dunning-Kruger Effect — How it is a faulty theory: by Khuram Rafique on khuram

A typical closed minded approach … Actual DK effect is the confidence that all the knowledge is contained only in peer reviewed books and journals. Dunning and Kruger were suffering from this actual DK effect. They formulated a theory about a person named McArthur Wheeler … and they did not bother to see that case type of McArthur Wheeler was already well theorized in a 19th century (pre-peer review era) important book.

The nature of contempt of ‘scientists’ is that for them any outside thing does not even exist. If they say that Big Bang Theory is the only explanation of related observed phenomenon, they are right only to the extent that yes within peer reviewed domain it is the only thing in town. And they do not publish outside things. Therefore only thing in town remains the only thing in town.

Actual DK effect is like a cartoon character who has a big nose. Everywhere he can see only his own nose. So only his own nose is everywhere. This is the nature of contempt of present day ‘scientist’ against open mindedness.

Open minded person says alternatives exist … just open your mind. Our scientist would say no everywhere is my own nose. No other thing exists in town.

About the author

Leave a Reply

2 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
2 Comment authors
Carl D'AgostinoPhysics and Art Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Physics and Art

Interesting argument. Most physicist that delve into the big bang end up agreeing that it fits the data best among current theories, but I find very few in person that are very comfortable with it. I’m a physicist who’s looked into this, and find too much sheer nuttiness in the big bang to believe it actually represents reality, but as of now I can’t point to something better. I think many physicists, in my acquaintance, who aren’t overly invested in big bang research, are actually waiting for a theory that makes more sense to overtake the big bang.

Carl D'Agostino

“Contempt of ‘scientists’ against open mindedness is clear” This attitude is the very antithesis of being a scientist. One would want to be bombarded and challenged at every level of theory to look to refine and reconsider understanding. There is so much going on in paleontology right now with new discoveries of dinosaurs, dinosaur – bird links and early humans. Evolutionary understanding has changed dramatically even within the last decade and today’s evolutionary theory esp with ability to research genes and DNA is a far cry from early Darwinism. Finding loopholes and errors in our thinking ought to be a… Read more »