Posted on 10/12/2006 9:06:16 PM PDT by phoenix0468
The latest interview was with an Independent Scientist called Ron Pearson. Ron spent much of his life a University lecturer in Thermodynamics and Fluid mechanics. He was the inventor of the Gas Wave Turbine and in his retirement he studied the Physics and Mathematics found in Quantum Theory and Relativity. Because of this unique background Ron was able to see huge flaws in the Big Bang Theory and in the theories of Relativity. He has therefore spent the last 16 years developing a new theory on the creation of the Universe that did away with the previous inconsistencies as well as meeting all the observational data that went to prove the old theories. The following summary of the interview will give you an idea of these flaws and outline Ron's new theories.
(Excerpt) Read more at evolutionday.com ...
I confess .. I don't have the mental capacity .. would someone kindly synopsize?
Wow. About halfway through, that turned from really interesting into stupid.
And God said “let there be a universe” and “BANG” there was a universe.
Big Bang theory explained …
In the article Ron never says the big bang didn't happen, he just says it happened a much longer ago than is commonly believed.
In addition, to quote God, he said, "Let there be light, and there was light."
But I digress. The creation of the universe and subsequently our own existence is something of great interest to many, otherwise religion would never have been invented.
My only motivation in posting this article is to present what seemed to me to be an interesting perspective on the subject.
I note with some dismay he won't show his "proof" without taking money from you. It should also be noted that anyone can come up with a theory that fits perfectly with all observations-- I could claim right now that magic pixies are behind everything-- and ust try to prove me wrong! That is essentially what this man has done-- he's just made up a new set of rules to fit the observations, but his rules aren't testable. The key to scientific progress is that it is testable and falsifiable-- it cannot be proven right, but it can be proven wrong. This man has come up with a neat circular theory that has no holes in it because he says it doesn't. My "magic pixie theory' has no holes in it-- because I say it accounts for everything-- and it cannot be tested. Such is is the concept of his negative primary-- it creates a strange effect (lateral momentum from nothing and therefore energy from nothing) because he says it does, and it cannot be proven otherwise because it supposedly explains eeryhting he wants it to. And, just for perspective, think about what he's claiming he's done-- he's allegedly come up with a new theory that's perfect in every way and negates thousands of years of science and other scientists' thought in just a few hard hours. If you ask me, sounds like he works for the DPRK nuclear program.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1718547/posts
Here's an article, albeit from the archives of Discover, that might be much more relevant than the chicanery of the present one.
LOL! I was just reading that exact article on FreeRepublic when i checked to see if I had any posts to me and boom! there you are!
Self ping for read later
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.