Cosmology Intelligent Design

Dark energy critics are outnumbered, we are told, and its defenders are digging in

Spread the love

possible evidence for dark energy/NASA, CXC, SAO,A.Vikhlinin et al.

Recently, some studies have cast doubt on dark energy but dark energy proponents are digging in:

A team of Korean scientists published findings on Jan. 5 questioning the reliability of using supernovae to measure intergalactic distances. This followed a paper published in November that also cast doubt on the supernova evidence from a different angle, arguing that our galactic neighborhood is flowing in a particular direction, affecting certain kinds of distance measurements.

In both instances, other scientists pushed back, noting potential flaws in the methodology and conclusions of the new studies.

While most scientists still seem to believe that dark energy remains on solid ground, no one yet has any firm idea what it actually is.

Ramin Skibba, “Dark Energy Skeptics Raise Concerns, But Remain Outnumbered” at Inside Science

Maybe dark energy is cosmic consciousness? Don’t laugh before you read this: “Could information be—at long last—the missing dark matter?

Lots is at stake, including a 2011 Nobel Prize that some think was incorrectly awarded. For more on that, see “New Scientist: Dark Matter’s No-Show Casts Doubt On Big Bang; Rob Sheldon Replies “In 2011, Perlmutter, Schmidt & Reiss (all younger than me) were awarded a Nobel for observations made on Type Ia supernovae that very weakly suggested the presence of anti-gravity or “dark energy”. (The observations on 74 SN/Ia have since weakened considerably as 1000 more SN/Ia were added to the data set and the Planck data was analyzed, which is one reason for the urgency of the award. After all, a Nobel prize makes anything true!)”

See also: Rob Sheldon: Are “multiple measurements ”closing in on dark energy? Nope.

Researchers: Either dark energy or string theory is wrong. Or both are. But dark energy is so glitzy! Isn’t it a line of cosmetics already?

Researchers: The symmetrons needed to explain dark energy were not found

Rob Sheldon: Has dark energy finally been found? In pop science mags?

Are recent dark energy findings a blow for multiverse theory?


Science at sunset: Dark energy might make a multiverse hospitable to life… if it exists

6 Replies to “Dark energy critics are outnumbered, we are told, and its defenders are digging in

  1. 1
    Seversky says:

    “But beware of the dark side. Anger, fear, aggression; the dark side of the Force are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice.”

  2. 2
    Pearlman says:

    ‘Most’ has no scientific weight, as one scientist is enough if their explanation adds up.
    We find the science adds up without dark matter and dark energy, that is required by the current SCM-LCDM to have a chance of being the actuality.
    so using basic science and all the empirical observations we find the universe approximates the approx. sphere that is the visible universe, no ongoing cosmic expansion and a radius of 4B LY max.
    see how The YeC SPIRAL and the current SCM cosmological it should replace after study, fair consideration and dissemination, match up.

  3. 3
    polistra says:

    When scientists get grants and jobs and awards for supporting Theory 1, and get nothing but insults for supporting Theory 2, you can be sure the consensus will support Theory 1. The problem isn’t logic, the problem is tenure and grants. Take away tenure and grants and truth has a much better chance of survival.

  4. 4
    Seversky says:

    Scientists are human just like the rest of us. Some will place a higher priority on financial and professional security. They have bills to pay and families to support just like the rest of us. But others will forego the money they could make elsewhere in the interests of pursuing the research that fascinates them. Without tenure and grants, how else will they finance pure research? Industry tends to fund only that which promises profits in the near future.

  5. 5
    Truthfreedom says:

    @ Seversky

    Scientists are human just like the rest of us.

    The problem is that, absent God, “science” is the “substitute deity”. And scientists are now the new “priests” and “prophets”.

  6. 6
    Silver Asiatic says:

    People believe that scientists are objective, but interpretations of the data are biased by various interests that have nothing to do with what is actually occurring in reality.
    The emotional opposition to the Design inference that we find so often is a perfect example of that. Why have so much hatred for merely an alternative interpretation of the data?

Leave a Reply