OH NO NO NO NO AAAHAHAAHAAH

>headline that ends in a question mark
I'm guessing the answer is no.

they were already losing hold of the narrative this lie is the (new *science*) which keeps them forever on top of people averse to waking up.

Attached: 1486043514509.jpg (854x687, 101.99K)

>To everyone who sees them, the new James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) images of the cosmos are beautifully awe-inspiring. But to most professional astronomers and cosmologists, they are also extremely surprising — not at all what was predicted by theory. In the flood of technical astronomical papers published online since July 12, the authors report again and again that the images show surprisingly many galaxies, galaxies that are surprisingly smooth, surprisingly small and surprisingly old. Lots of surprises, and not necessarily pleasant ones. One paper’s title begins with the candid exclamation: “Panic!”

>Why do the JWST’s images inspire panic among cosmologists? And what theory’s predictions are they contradicting? The papers don’t actually say. The truth that these papers don’t report is that the hypothesis that the JWST’s images are blatantly and repeatedly contradicting is the Big Bang Hypothesis that the universe began 14 billion years ago in an incredibly hot, dense state and has been expanding ever since. Since that hypothesis has been defended for decades as unquestionable truth by the vast majority of cosmological theorists, the new data is causing these theorists to panic. “Right now I find myself lying awake at three in the morning,” says Alison Kirkpatrick, an astronomer at the University of Kansas in Lawrence, “and wondering if everything I’ve done is wrong.” [Update: Kirkpatrick has protested Lerner’s handling of this quotation. See a Note on this by following the link below to Mind Matters News.]

imagine thinking that the universe has ever had a beginning

Attached: 1510322128344.jpg (450x450, 46.66K)

They found galaxies that are apparently older than the Big Bang is supposed to be.

>Although we didn’t usually hear of it, there’s been dissatisfaction with the Standard Model, which begins with the Big Bang, ever since it was first proposed by Georges Lemaître nearly a century ago. But no one expected the James Webb Space Telescope to contribute to the debate.
An Interested Party

>Now, Lerner is the author of a book called The Big Bang Never Happened (1992) but — while that makes him an interested party — it doesn’t make him wrong. He will be speaking at the HowTheLightGetsIn festival in London (September 17–18, 2022) sponsored by the Institute for Art and Ideas (IAI), as a participant in the “Cosmology and the Big Bust” debate.

>The upcoming debate, which features philosopher of science Bjørn Ekeberg and Yale astrophysicist Priyamvada Natarajan, along with Lerner, is premised as follows:

>"The Big Bang theory crucially depends on the ‘inflation’ hypothesis that at the outset the universe expanded many orders of magnitude faster than the speed of light. But experiments have failed to prove evidence of cosmic inflation and since the theory’s inception it has been beset by deep puzzles. Now one of its founders, Paul Steinhardt has denounced the theory as mistaken and ‘scientifically meaningless’."
>"Do we have to give up the theory of cosmic inflation and seek a radical alternative? Might alternative theories like the Big Bounce, or abandoning the speed of light provide a solution? Or are such alternatives merely sticking plasters to avoid the more radical conclusion that it is time to give up on the Big Bang altogether?"

>A Potential Solution
>Here’s a debate on this general topic from last year’s festival (but without JWST data). It features theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder, author of Lost in Math: How Beauty Leads Physics Astray, along with Ekeberg and particle physicist Sam Henry.

No they didn't.

Retarded beyond comprehension. Atheists and science cunts must just kill themselves.

fuck do I care about some shining dots 6 gorrilion light years away?

>So what's the new theory?
Still large, but not quite so big bang

LOL

Attached: file.png (995x234, 57.51K)

imagine being a high IQ educated individual who is well versed in the logos of metaphysics? i dont have to

>trust the science
>science was wrong
>why should i care?

Sorry did get that wrong. They found one when stars are not supposed to exist.

>he cant into many worlds theory
brainlets get off my board

it makes sense when you realize God IS the universe - all that surrounds us and all that we are and has no beginning or end

This was meant for

>QRD ?
The #1 mission of the James Webb Space Telescope was to test the Big Bang theory. Well, they might have found evidence that contradicts Big Bang theory.

the big bang happened when i was fucking ur mom

>Take your vaxx and stop asking questions.
Space is fake.

Attached: 1639809622303.jpg (400x386, 24.8K)

it's every day a new retarded theory with science these days

can't even take that shit seriously anymore.

Also for some reason I hate the James Webb space telescope in particular. Bring back hubble.

>trust the science
>science was wrong
>why should i care?

You were never supposed to "trust" the science, lol. That's one thing both the science worshippers and the science denialists get wrong: They treat the entire field like dogma.

It's called a theory for a reason you know.

hardly the first time soience was wrong. time to update the firmware

This is what JWST images look like before they are photoshopped. They have “star burst” patterns in the stars because they comp 18 images together and use an algorithm to bracket them in what they call “the snowflake of doom”

Attached: 7AD423D9-F577-4429-80F1-4FED4ABFD534.jpg (1024x561, 87.98K)

"cutting edge research" = fuck they are getting close, adjust the bullshit! giving a crumb to those points people exposing their lies, but only as a means to obfuscate and divert away with the ever expanding variable of false modeled reality math matrix keeping people lost in space. (((ever expanding hole in the sandbox to stick your head into, shut the fuck up and earn your phd/shitty wage))). As long as they manage to keep you away from the real world at all cost.

Attached: 1660059427705850.jpg (710x708, 59.91K)

answer: No

It's plainly obvious but we have cunts amongst that ignore their loved experience and that everything is only the appearance of their perception and the only certainly is the KNOWING (consciousness, awareness of being aware, I AM that I Am, God) of it.

There's no stars, just projectors.

what evidence specifically?

>It's called a theory for a reason you know.
Ah yes, that’s why it;s been espoused as a fact for decades. Just like the “theory” of evolution.

The universe doesn't really exist

>it's every day a new retarded theory with science these days

the point of science is to constantly have new theories until you understand things.

leaked photo of a newly discovered universe behind the event horizon of a black hole

Attached: 1660277150476.png (1300x866, 2.49M)

>evolutionnews
lmao

Evidence the universe is not expanding. Galaxies older than thought possible.

they're gonna debunk evolution now any day, just you wait

underrated af

For example, there was red shift periodicity around a, i think, quasar or pulsar…showing that red shifting wasn’t the effect of expansion. Too many galaxies, galacies that are too old, etc.

Short answer: god. Long answer: goooooooooooooooooooooooooooood.

basically they theorized that they would find a relatively specific (lower) quantity of older galaxies, but they found more older galaxies than they expected. it doesn't actually prove anything against the big bang, this is just a thread about a clickbait article

The biggie will be that 'matter cannot be discovered and doesn't exist'.

>I think, erm, umm....

so just say whatever you "think" :)

The universe is compromised of foreskin, collected over trillions of years. Jews are aliens and created the universe with foreskin. A rock is just petrified foreskin.

>Ah yes, that’s why it's been espoused as a fact for decades

No, at least not by the scientists themselves.

Cosmological theories were always understood to be "best guesses," no real scientist would cruise around telling everyone that the big bang theory is 100% true fact. That's insane, how could any human claim to know the origin of the universe?

It's the media and the science worshipper's faults for construing a theory as a fact.

ask ya mom, she was old enough to see

Attached: 10bf1bccac3a01c55159549c065ec4c402bb6390385ce77f11cda97a7f7642b2.jpg (800x427, 40.39K)