Brian Cox: What Really Goes on at the Large Hadron Collider

CMB does NOT prove the standard model.. it never ceases to amaze me how many people just repeat this myth over and over again. If you examine the history of predictions of the CMB, you will see the actual value is FAR off from the original predictions from the standard model. Of course, they don't teach you that in the textbooks..

Plasma Cosmology has huge supporting evidence. You evidently have no F**king idea what you're talking about so just sit down and stfu.

Two words: background radiation

Plasma cosmology isn't accepted because it has little supporting evidence. But it's no surprise that doesn't stop you, since you're apparently a conspiracy theory wingnut.

i never said it fits 100%.. but it fits far more than the standard model does!

if the mainstream actually excepted it is wrong about alot of things, and embraced plasma cosmology, we mite get somewhere lol..

hey but lets be honest your plasma cosmology thing doesnt fit 100%

ps
im not saying that the theory is bad

how does this theory fits? saying "we have a formula that doesnt work yet but will work if we discover some undiscovered particles"
?!

They are actually making the reality to fit the formula

cant u see that?!

my point what that Miller-Urey experiment proved nothing about the origin of DNARNA

ok. i'll read some, but If u read the whole thing can u explain how DNA was actually formed?

thanks

Extreme science is all about CONTROL. The criticism is about the attitude of males who are mad of total control of NATURE. The mind trying to understand itself not realising the poor brain itself is restricted to 3D. It's watching nature through a keyhole.

well if it fits so much better than the standard model then you have nothing to worry about! because in a few years time it will be the accepted norm of the scientific community. see, real scientists wouldn't ignore a theory because it is or is not popular. like some people do. now, get of your high horse, tool.

btw, ostriches doesn't actually put their head in the sand when they're scared. also that symbolism is used to describe fear, not ignorance like you apparently did. made no sense.

sorry, but you're living in a F**king fantasy world. you obviously still have much to realize about the way the world of science really works

plasma cosmology fits FAR better than the standard model. it is fought against because it demolishes some long held dogma, not because it isn't a good fit/theory

get back to me when you pull your head out of the sand

stop refering to some yohoo's youtube video you tool! if by "popularity" you mean that a theory needs to be published in a peer reviewed magazine like science before anyone takes it seriously, then yes it is based on popularity. but that is because if the theory is WRONG you'd rather find that out right away than after you've gotten funding and built, say, a large hadron collider. every scientist can't be wrong is the idea.

meaning, if there WERE a better theory, it wouldn't be fought against..

I think you will find it IS based upon popularity and dogma..

The expanding universe theory has no legs to stand on anymore, yet its still taught in schools etc as fact. Those who have tried to expose it, have lost their positions in academic institutions etc If you watch that video i mentioned, you will see several experts in their own right tell you exactly what i've just said

Science is a business, period. Sorry to brake it to you..

I told you, science is not based on popularity, mainstreams or YOUR opinion. I don't follow the mainstream just because it's there, I follow the theory that actually fits reality as we see it, that theory just happen to be mainstream because it FITS.

that's like going "I don't believe that man landed on the moon because everyone else does. I'll only believe that when I'm on the moon myself."

also, the irony of you telling me this then telling me to believe your theory of some youtube video...

Such a great speech.

Well if you enjoy following other people, by all means follow the mainstream blindly without understanding any of it yourself.

I on the other hand, from the first moment i came into contact with plasma cosmology, i knew it was far closer to the truth than the gravity driven bullshit we currently use.

just because the mainstream doesn't agree upon it, doesn't mean its not right. i suggest you watch "cosmology quest" here on youtube to get a better understanding of what this truely means!

This guy is almost like one of the guys working in the High Energy Magic building at Unseen University... Not Ponder Stibbons, though. But one of them others.

I never insulted your intelligence. I insulted your methods. YOU insulted your intelligence by feeling insulted intelligently by a random dude on the internet.

and the theory that "entertains" the universe best isn't up to your opinion. and whatever theory that "entertained" the universe best would be the one scientifically agreed on. which isn't plasma cosmology.

No. I don't have a theory. The theory that entertains the observable universe best though IMO, is plasma cosmology. It explains so many things that the standard model fails to do.

Maybe you should check it out instead of just insulting my intelligence

and of course YOUR way is the correct one, right? scientists are just not agreeing with you because they're all money grubbing a-holes, right? it all makes sense now, how could I have been so blind?

Your username says it all. "Stop the mind" indeed. You are no scientist, and you know nothing about the science you so vehemently criticize.

It is disgusting to risk the life of humanity in the presence of such hyper nuclear experiments performed by males.

The expensive madness of these male physicists S**kS the wealth of citizens at an EXTREME rate.

Science is restricted to primitive EMPIRICISM which definition is QUACKERY - if you didn't know it.

This world is put at risk by the indulgence of quackery by primitive males infected by COMPETITION and SENSATION.

I'm a scientist myself. Therefore I can tell.

Cosmic Background Radiation really does not prove anything in regards to the Big Bang. Repeating this endlessly does not conjure up more credability either.

If you take the time to examine plasma cosmology, you will find it makes ALOT more sense than the current standard model.

Particle physics is moot anyway, especially in regards to cosmology. It refuses to F**k off because of dogma and money in the science industry, even though it clearly has taken us down the wrong road.

five words - stellar formation via birkeland currents

He was good at magnetohydrodynamics, but he was no cosmologist. And as any biologist can tell you, things can't always just be scaled up. A cell made a trillion times larger would die instantly - like this dinosaur of an idea.

PS - CMB. That is all.

Well, they do know the structure of DNA. Xray crystallography confirms the experimental work of Watson and Crick. Its true that sometimes the formulae precede the empirical proof, but that doesn't make it 'bullshit science'. This is just the difference between inductive and deductive proofs.

If you think the papers on abiogenesis explain nothing, I suggest you read the paper itself, rather than the wiki article. Its only a few hundred pages, and for someone so obviously educated, an easy read.

That's EXACTLY the point. I was responding to stepheninky's ludicrous post. Imagine if someone was using his "logic" in a court case.

er when that happens, the client is guilty... who says u need witnesses ? fingerprints, DNA tests is enough to prove he is guilty. I don't think there are any cases with actual witnesses. Maybe 1 in 10000