WMAP worthless?

http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2007/11/big_bang



And:

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/522685

Chicago Journals - The Astrophysical Journal



And the man himself for those who like strawmen:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrit_Verschuur

Gerrit Verschuur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Also:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wired_magazine

Wired (magazine) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



With over 50 years in the business, this is not a man who makes casual mistakes on such an important matter.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think the first point is that CMB experiments have been happening for about 40 years (give or take). In that time, thousands of physicists have evaluated the same data, and worked on the same physics, solved the same problems, and scrutinized the same data. This isn't some guy with a telescope looking at canals on Mars---this is a huge international collaboration involving thousands of people.

The second point is precisely this:

There HAS been a statistical analysis of Verschuur's work, and it came back negative. So why is this still an issue? Answer: Over-Zealous science journalists (or copy editors) trying to sell papers or generate website traffic.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Then they are careful, deliberate mistakes. Kinda like yours. You know the information you ask for is out there but you don't go looking for it.

Do you think there aren't astrophysicists who've been studying the skys for 50 years, been working on the CMB since it's discovery in the mid 60s and who think the inflationary BB model is a staggering acheivement?

Oh wait, I'm logged in as AlphaNumeric! I should be logged in as BenTheMan. Or Euler. Or Trippy. Or Rpenner. Damn, who am I supposed to be now. Kaneda, little help?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Fuck these sockpuppets.

I need to consolidate my SciForums accounts so that there are less passwords to remember.

 

Don't we, I mean us, I mean you, I mean me, I mean they.... crap, what pronoun should I/we/us/them use when refering to myself/ourselves/themselves??

Anyway, whoever it is, couldn't said person(s) just keep their password(s) in their browser? Opera and Firefox automatically remember. I/you/they quite like the Wand feature in Opera. That way I can be three different people all in one thread with minimal effort. After running it through a couple of anonymous proxies, bouncing it off 3 satellites and hacking the half dozen internet sites I use to maintain my lies, like soton.ac.uk, arxiv.org and photoshoping myself into photos of Cambridge student life, after I've done my moderating jobs on PhysOrg.

And all before breakfast!

 

We essentially have a two dimensional view of very distant objects in space so have to gauge their distances. If everyone is using a faulty process, then everyone will come up with a faulty answer.

Have you got a link?

 

AlphaNumeric. Take the tablets. Your real personality is beginning to shine through.

 

You don't think these people scrutinize their approach?

Ummm...check the article you linked to. It helps if you read all the way to the bottom:

 

There's someone I'd like you to meet, They are called Sarcasm and Wit. You lot haven't met before, have you?

 

Still there kaneda?

 

Ben The Man. I have other calls on my time, unlike AlphaNumeric.

200 correlations is pushing coincidence too far. Especially since we have to look through that section of our galaxy to see the CMB.

This is a man who has spent 50 years at his job and it is insulting for Land to claim that he does not know his job. In 2003, TWO WHOLE YEARS BEFORE, Land started a PhD is Cosmology. WTF does she know?

A few others instinctively know Vershuur is wrong like creationists instinctively know science is wrong but do not produce any evidence.

Don't you think that Vershhur checked every other option before he published this, knowing what a fuss it would stir up? This is not a man who is going to make a dumb mistake and pay for it publicly afterwards.

 

Nothing to contribute to this thread, I see. Bored with having so much time on your hands?

 

If it's 200 correlations out of 200,000,000 possibilities, would that change your mind?

What was that you said about strawmen?

I don't know Vershhur's motives, but I do know what the article said.

 

Rather than you, who makes claims, refuses to back them up and something you aren't above yourself.

Nice hypocrisy.

Actually I've been reading a book on symplectic geometry today, as well are doing work on Lie algebras. Want to head over to the maths and physics forum to discuss things? Do you know the answer to this? Or perhaps you could talk to Ben and myself here about our work.

Can't you come up with anything new? Or are you going to keep saying "You've got too much free time on your hands, how do you do research?" despite the fact I've explained how I spend my time to you repeatedly. What do you spend your time doing? You don't work and you obviously don't read physics books. How did you learn about general relativity and cosmology, which you consider yourself very well versed on?

You must have plenty of free time and yet you have shown no learning or understanding or any effort to search for information, in all the time I've seen you post. :shrug:

By the way, I'm going on holiday for 3 weeks for the last 3 weeks of September. I thought I'd tell you now so you can begin cooking up conspiracy claims and other paranoid delusions of yours for when I don't post in a while.

 

Has this thread died? Or is kaneda still convinced that this guy is correct about WMAP?

 

He could be correct, until more data is brought forward to make sure his clams are dead and also buried.

 

Is Vershuur expected to check out 200,000,000 instances?

Don't you DEMAND that if someone speaks authoritatively on a subject that they at least know something about that subject?

Picking and choosing, I see. We know in the field of science, in instances like cold fusion, that anyone who denies the mainstream model risks being subjected to a hysterical barrage of hate that even creationist fanatics would find shameful. Vershuur would hardly risk this if he did not believe in what he says and was satisfied that he had evidence to back it up.

 

The lowest form of debate is believing you have won an argument because someone does not immediately reply.

Like AN, you seem to have nothing to do but post on forums. Who's minding the atom-smasher?

 

OmegaNumeric. I just pointed out your usual arrogant style of posting.

You have shown you have a good memory and can do maths. You have not shown that you can think of anything new. You just parrot the works of others. Big deal.

Going anywhere nice?

 

Forget this topic for a while. What I really want is to hear more about how you think simple things like electric current work. I've only had one good laugh since you said the original electrons in the current were destroyed.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please tell us more!!!!