The Electric Universe (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, March 13, 2011, 11:19 (4814 days ago) @ David Turell

David has, with characteristic honesty, explained why he was (still is?) sceptical about the Electrical Universe theory:-"I do not have the background of either Matt or Tony in the physical sciences. [..] my knowledge of particle physics, cosmology, the standard model etc. comes from articles and books by accepted experts."-In those fields that you have detailed knowledge of, you mount a powerful challenge to the "accepted experts", and you also know how difficult it is for scientists with unfashionable views to get themselves funded and published. This should teach you scepticism! My own background is in the arts, and I'm an autodidact in all matters scientific, which makes me all the more grateful to contributors like yourself, George, Matt and Tony for my ongoing education (as well as for your patience). I'm therefore rarely in a position to evaluate scientific evidence, but when this leads to inconsistencies, illogicalities, don't-knows and presumptuous don't-yet-knows, I know a hawk from a handsaw. Without taking sides on EU, I find Wal Thornhill's (and Tony's) objections to the Big Bang Theory as convincing as yours to aspects of the Theory of Evolution. Worth another look?-Here are three useful definitions of "expert":-1) Someone whose opinion we rely on until we know better.
2) Someone who knows what he's talking about so long as nobody else does.
3) Someone who avoids the small errors while sweeping on to the grand fallacy.