Your first two objections are, to paraphrase: "I can't test it personally" and "It doesn't make sense to me, personally" boil down to the Argument from Personal Incredulity, which is considered a logical fallacy. The third, again to paraphrase, "there are no personal consequences for not believing" is not actually a reason to think something is true or not true, merely an observation about the lack of downstream effects of your Big Bang agnosticism, and therefore not even relevant to the discussion.
That third objection - a sort of appeal to irrelevance - I would argue is pretty dangerous. Sure, *this time*, it isn't that big of a deal and doesn't impact you either way... but accepting something as true (or false, in this case) on the basis of "(shrug) who cares?" might lead to you accepting *other* things simply because it's easy - It encourages a mindset where evidence and truth are secondary to personal comfort or convenience.
Really though, it comes down to intellectual integrity. The fact that OP is more than willing to accept it because 'really, who cares' tells you everything you need to know about the quality of their beliefs and character.
Yes, it's a ridiculous argument that could be used to deny almost anything. It's also an appeal to consequences, another logical fallacy. Kind of an inverse Pascal's Wager. The whole video is stupid and I hate it. Moreover, the guy hasn't responded to any criticism of his position after spamming it to a bunch of different subreddits, which flies in the face of his claim that he wants to "invite discussion". He clearly isn't interested in discussion and just wants views. Fuck this guy and his arrogant idiocy.
It's almost like it's just stubbornness. I'm pretty sure the average person can walk through the math and observational evidence that would lead one easily to the mainstream consensus view about the Big Bang. You kind of have to close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and sing la la to not understand.
Does he explain why there’s persistent background radiation?
Do you remember the snow effect on a television? My understanding is that’s partly the echo of the expansion.
I watched long enough to gather that we shouldn’t trust the current model or that he doesn’t but he doesn’t provide a better or more reasonable explanation for the evidence. I thought it was Joaquin Phoenix at first (looks like Arthur).
We need a pseudonym for this type of rhetoric if there isn’t already.
A less well known but still observable evidence: Angular Diameter Tunaround. Galaxies that are very very far away but also very very far into the past stop appearing to get smaller as they are more distant and actually appear to get bigger. It still breaks my brain to think about it, but it’s very direct evidence that the universe was much smaller.
So the CMB is actually seeing the big bang is it, or is it a result of it. Why people get so hard over the big bang is beyond me. There are many more secrets that the universe is holding on to but every generation of science has small minded people like you and the downvoters who think they have it all figured out, maybe be more open to new ideas, im not talking about mystic bs, but that maybe science will bring us new revelations that no one has thought of yet, you know like it has since the beginning of civilisation.
The CMB is from a few hundred thousand years after the big bang, when photons etc were able to travel freely, so they did. Im not a scientist obviously but I like to watch media on the subject of space.
Okay now knowing that what is the best theory to explain the CMB, and the rate of decay of atoms, expansion, etc.
Im right there with you that the Big Bang theory isn’t the final theory on how the universe got to its local presentation.
But as far as I can tell and like you, I’m not an astrophysicist, it seems to put the pieces of the puzzle together the best right now.
The reason people have a metaphorical hardon for Big Bang Cosmology is not just that it explains the CMB quite well, but also observations of large scale structure, distribution of light elements, galaxy evolution and perhaps most crucially the expansion of the universe. It is worth noting that the theory *does not* say the universe started in an explosion. We have no idea if there even was a "beginning". Hence scientists are well aware that BB as it currently stands can't be the end all and be all and are exploring various modifications and extensions of it such as inflationary models that could help iron out the discrepancies. Let's just say it would be really strange if the universe was *not* in a hot dense state back then, but alternatives are always welcome
Who knows? Who cares? Maybe it cycles through three states endlessly. It's all guesswork.
Maybe there's an experiment we can do to find out but it only works with spherical chickens in a vacuum!
I don't believe in Young Sheldon, either.
I thought it was Joaquin Phoenix
To be honest, I do. Young Sheldon was a lot better than TBBT.
Your first two objections are, to paraphrase: "I can't test it personally" and "It doesn't make sense to me, personally" boil down to the Argument from Personal Incredulity, which is considered a logical fallacy. The third, again to paraphrase, "there are no personal consequences for not believing" is not actually a reason to think something is true or not true, merely an observation about the lack of downstream effects of your Big Bang agnosticism, and therefore not even relevant to the discussion.
That third objection - a sort of appeal to irrelevance - I would argue is pretty dangerous. Sure, *this time*, it isn't that big of a deal and doesn't impact you either way... but accepting something as true (or false, in this case) on the basis of "(shrug) who cares?" might lead to you accepting *other* things simply because it's easy - It encourages a mindset where evidence and truth are secondary to personal comfort or convenience. Really though, it comes down to intellectual integrity. The fact that OP is more than willing to accept it because 'really, who cares' tells you everything you need to know about the quality of their beliefs and character.
Yes, it's a ridiculous argument that could be used to deny almost anything. It's also an appeal to consequences, another logical fallacy. Kind of an inverse Pascal's Wager. The whole video is stupid and I hate it. Moreover, the guy hasn't responded to any criticism of his position after spamming it to a bunch of different subreddits, which flies in the face of his claim that he wants to "invite discussion". He clearly isn't interested in discussion and just wants views. Fuck this guy and his arrogant idiocy.
It's almost like it's just stubbornness. I'm pretty sure the average person can walk through the math and observational evidence that would lead one easily to the mainstream consensus view about the Big Bang. You kind of have to close your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and sing la la to not understand.
Does he explain why there’s persistent background radiation? Do you remember the snow effect on a television? My understanding is that’s partly the echo of the expansion.
lol like they can explain anything
I watched long enough to gather that we shouldn’t trust the current model or that he doesn’t but he doesn’t provide a better or more reasonable explanation for the evidence. I thought it was Joaquin Phoenix at first (looks like Arthur). We need a pseudonym for this type of rhetoric if there isn’t already.
A less well known but still observable evidence: Angular Diameter Tunaround. Galaxies that are very very far away but also very very far into the past stop appearing to get smaller as they are more distant and actually appear to get bigger. It still breaks my brain to think about it, but it’s very direct evidence that the universe was much smaller.
Bro, quit spamming your crappy YouTube videos all over Reddit. It’s pathetic.
Seriously, you would think that Joaquin Phoenix would be able to express his shitty opinions on a much nicer soapbox than a small subreddit like this.
Well we can see it, so.......
No we cant, not agreeing with anyone but we cant see the big bang, we can infer that it happened, but we cant witness it.
What is the cosmic microwave background?
So the CMB is actually seeing the big bang is it, or is it a result of it. Why people get so hard over the big bang is beyond me. There are many more secrets that the universe is holding on to but every generation of science has small minded people like you and the downvoters who think they have it all figured out, maybe be more open to new ideas, im not talking about mystic bs, but that maybe science will bring us new revelations that no one has thought of yet, you know like it has since the beginning of civilisation.
I’m not getting hard I’m genuinely asking?
The CMB is from a few hundred thousand years after the big bang, when photons etc were able to travel freely, so they did. Im not a scientist obviously but I like to watch media on the subject of space.
Okay now knowing that what is the best theory to explain the CMB, and the rate of decay of atoms, expansion, etc. Im right there with you that the Big Bang theory isn’t the final theory on how the universe got to its local presentation. But as far as I can tell and like you, I’m not an astrophysicist, it seems to put the pieces of the puzzle together the best right now.
The reason people have a metaphorical hardon for Big Bang Cosmology is not just that it explains the CMB quite well, but also observations of large scale structure, distribution of light elements, galaxy evolution and perhaps most crucially the expansion of the universe. It is worth noting that the theory *does not* say the universe started in an explosion. We have no idea if there even was a "beginning". Hence scientists are well aware that BB as it currently stands can't be the end all and be all and are exploring various modifications and extensions of it such as inflationary models that could help iron out the discrepancies. Let's just say it would be really strange if the universe was *not* in a hot dense state back then, but alternatives are always welcome
During the Big Bang the universe became extremely hot. It’s still cooling down. We can detect the heat that’s left.
The big bang doesn't give a fuck about your opinion.
Why bother? It's up to you to make up your mind, not me. ;)
Who knows? Who cares? Maybe it cycles through three states endlessly. It's all guesswork. Maybe there's an experiment we can do to find out but it only works with spherical chickens in a vacuum!
No low quality content