Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Dark matter skeptics wanted?

arroba Email

From astronomy journalist Stuart Clark at Aeon:

To get computer models to look similar to the Universe around us, cosmologists have assumed that around 96 per cent of matter and energy are in forms that we cannot directly detect. You might think that this would make cosmologists wary of relying on such hypothetical substances. Yet for the majority working today, dark matter and dark energy are every bit as real as the stars and galaxies that we can see.

Such corporate belief might work for business, but it has no place in science. Back in 1620, Francis Bacon published his Novum Organum (The New Method). In his description of how to investigate nature, he cautioned would-be scientists about four ‘idols of the mind’.More.

Yes. The term “skepticism” has taken a beating of late. It has come to mean new atheism, elevator rows, and flying horse controversies.

It should mean a questioning approach to establishment claims. Maybe another approach would work just as well. If we can’t examine it, why can’t we?

See also: First, dark matter, now dark life?


Dark matter claim to be tested

"for the majority" is, as Crichton said, a political position not a scientific conclusion. I'm skeptical of everything, even my own skepticism. It eludes me at remarkably significant moments. You can invent unobservables without end, your theory will not survive continued observations. There are no known exceptions to this rule. ScuzzaMan
SPIRAL cosmological redshift (CR) hypothesis also does away for the need of the missing/absent dark matter, also explains why CR is not evidence of ongoing cosmic expansion. reference 'Distant Starlight and the age, formation and structure of the universe' Pearlman

Leave a Reply