The Fog Clears, but what about redshift?

Hundreds of TPODs have been published since the summer of 2004. In particular, we invite discussion of present and recent TPODs, perhaps with additional links to earlier TPOD pages. Suggestions for future pages will be welcome. Effective TPOD drafts will be MORE than welcome and could be your opportunity to become a more active part of the Thunderbolts team.

Moderators: MGmirkin, bboyer

Locked
PlasmaKid
Posts: 8
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 7:59 am

The Fog Clears, but what about redshift?

Unread post by PlasmaKid » Tue Apr 17, 2012 6:41 am

Hasn't the redshift controversy been put to rest? http://scientopia.org/blogs/galacticint ... redshifts/ claims that studies done to verify Arp's work find, well, nothing. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...633...41T Is one such study which took his work seriously and couldn't find any of these troubling quasars and their redshift discrepencies (or so the article claims)

Is the redshift problem so important to EU&PC? Isn't it more of a Big Bang related issue? Also, I am far from an expert on this, (I did read Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies) but it doesnt seem like Arp has made the greatest case for his theories... To me it seems entirely based on statistics & probabilities and less on actual verifiable evidence.

Thoughts?

PK

Goldminer
Posts: 1024
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 9:08 pm

Re: The Fog Clears, but what about redshift?

Unread post by Goldminer » Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:32 am

PlasmaKid wrote:Hasn't the redshift controversy been put to rest? http://scientopia.org/blogs/galacticint ... redshifts/ claims that studies done to verify Arp's work find, well, nothing. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005ApJ...633...41T Is one such study which took his work seriously and couldn't find any of these troubling quasars and their redshift discrepencies (or so the article claims)

Is the redshift problem so important to EU&PC? Isn't it more of a Big Bang related issue? Also, I am far from an expert on this, (I did read Quasars, Redshifts, and Controversies) but it doesnt seem like Arp has made the greatest case for his theories... To me it seems entirely based on statistics & probabilities and less on actual verifiable evidence.

Thoughts?

PK
Your first link is actually about whether Siggy and Gordon Lamps understand what Neirid and Rob have to say, and vice versa. When consensus thinkers set out to prove that Halton Arp is wrong, they feign to understand the process necessary to find the Mother galaxy and the children. Consequently when none are found by their self invented method, they jump with glee that they have proven intrinsic red shift wrong. How silly they look when the proper method still shows intrinsic red shift! This discussion and links are posted here on Tbolt forum already.
I sense a disturbance in the farce.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests