13 Puzzles

Recently, an article was posted in the times relaying the 13 most puzzling scientific conundrums of our time. With them we can see the biasness of modern cosmology affects every one of them. They are asking questions without knowing the circumstances and are unwilling to bend their theories from the "perfect principles" they laid out that the universe must be.

Nothing will ever change if you are not willing to change your theory.

The first one alone makes an Plasma Cosmologist simply laugh.

"We can only account for 4 per cent of the cosmos

If you’re wondering what the LHC might do for you, how’s this: it might just find a whole quarter of the universe."

Or

"Destabilising our view of the universe

A decade ago, we discovered that the fundamental constants of physics might not be so constant after all."

This is the problem: Gravity is the only force holding the universe together, and if we find variances, then we need to add matter to make up the difference. Matter we cannot see, but this Dark Matter MUST be there. This is, to a scientist, saying:

"The magician pulled a rabbit out of his hat, and the rabbit was not there before, so the magician can teleport matter with his mind."

Seriously.

Peak Oil Myth

Lending credence to the Russian' view of Refilling Oil Well's comes information from Geotimes.



Below the Gulf of Mexico, hydrocarbons flow upward through an intricate network of conduits and reservoirs. They start in thin layers of source rock and, from there, buoyantly rise to the surface. On their way up, the hydrocarbons collect in little rivulets, and create temporary pockets like rain filling a pond. Eventually most escape to the ocean. And, this is all happening now, not millions and millions of years ago, says Larry Cathles, a chemical geologist at Cornell University.

"We're dealing with this giant flow-through system where the hydrocarbons are generating now, moving through the overlying strata now, building the reservoirs now and spilling out into the ocean now," Cathles says.

He's bringing this new view of an active hydrocarbon cycle to industry, hoping it will lead to larger oil and gas discoveries. By matching the chemical signatures of the oil and gas with geologic models for the structures below the seafloor, petroleum geologists could tap into reserves larger than the North Sea, says Cathles, who presented his findings at the meeting of the American Chemical Society in New Orleans on March 27.



"A big part of the future of exploration is being able to effectively use chemical information," Cathles says. Working in an area with more oil by at least a factor of two than the North Sea, he says he hopes that his models will help companies better allocate their resources. But equally important, Cathles says, is that his work is shifting the way people think about natural hydrocarbon vent systems — from the past to the present.

The Oilfields are refilling from below.

Hemisphere Crust Imbalance

Dennis McCarthy has come through again in demonstrating, with science, the reason for the sizable amount of crust on the earth's Northern Hemisphere and the decidedly less mass on the Southern Hemisphere.

In a video here he explains the reasons. It is based on the nature of the cracks along the southern part of the planet, particularly around Antarctica. I recommend it for anyone who is serious about exploring the potential of the new paradigm as it blossoms.

Our Self Importance

Recently, Scientists are coming to the conclusion that they alone are lucky enough to know the universe. Those that came before us were too primative and we may not be able to see the wonderous universe for what it is, those after us, apparently, will never know.

Obviously the Big Bang Paradigm is in trouble if they can predict its own defunctness.

The authors go on to ponder what this means in terms of the anthropic principle: the idea that we exist in a universe that's got conditions favorable to life largely because anything else would preclude any life arising that could ponder the universe. They suggest that there's another layer of complexity on top of that, namely that we only recognize that there is an anthropic principle because we came along at the right time. Too much earlier, and we wouldn't be able to detect that the universe is in a new inflationary era, which tells us that it's dominated by dark energy. Too much later, and we wouldn't be able to know that there's a universe at all. As the authors put it, "we live in a very special time in the evolution of the universe: the time at which we can observationally verify that we live in a very special time in the evolution of the universe!"

How faith based has cosmology become that no matter what evidence, what science and what questions are brought out against it, Cosmologists only see the same thing, invisible matter and forces where only electromagnetism is required.

The course, is hammered out ahead, unchanging and completely erroneous.

The Scientific Dogma

"We stand at a time in scientific history that will be embarrassing to look back on from the vantage point of the next century. An entire subgroup of science consisting of a majority of astrophysicists and cosmologists is now -- and has been -- smugly ignoring the fruits of 150 or so years of electrical science. This subgroup feels perfectly confident in postulating the existence of processes and entities that cannot be verified experimentally in earthbound labs. But that doesn't mean those processes can't happen in space, they say. When there are perfectly valid electrical explanations for certain phenomena, it is irresponsible to ignore those explanations and invent new science to avoid using them. People will ask, years from now, How could they have ignored electricity in space when it was staring them in the face?"

"Classic astronomy (and its offshoots: helioseismology, astrophysics, cosmology, etc.) have never made any real predictions that turned out to be true although they are past-masters at inventing dynamos and invisible entities to explain things retroactively. After-the-fact explanations are easy, especially if you can get away with saying, The hidden dynamo did it.... [C]lassical astronomers were wrong about how the auroras are powered, about the temperature of Venus, about the rocky nature of comets, about x-rays coming from comets and other objects, about the existence of natural radio emissions from the planets. And I claim they are wrong about many things they are now saying about the Sun."

"... The standard astrophysical models are far more speculative [than the Electric Sun model]. They are built up of speculation cantilevered onto speculation that is ever farther removed from any empirical basis. And a tremendous amount of doubt is piling up about them. They do not explain (without ad hoc and a posteriori adjustments) many of the observations that are being made as the Electric Sun model does. (The fusion model doesn't even explain why the solar corona exists in the first place, let alone its three million Kelvin temperature inversion.) Each time new data comes in from space probes, astronomers typically announce their surprise and rush back to the drawing board. They then busy themselves modifying (adding complexity to) their models -- reminiscent of Ptolemaic epicycles -- and emerge confidently claiming they knew this all along. In the one case where they deigned to make reference to anything electrical (the release of magnetic energy) they got it wrong and had to discover new properties of magnetic fields that do not exist."
- Donald E. Scott - Electrical Engineer

Wikipedia Censoring Science

Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia, information source to thousands is certainly not without flaws. I post here links to certain discussions in Plasma Cosmology that certainly seem to indicate a concerted effort to minimalize the way Plasma's work and to disconnect Cosmology and Electricity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Plasma_cosmology

In this you will see the consistent mocking and ridicule from 'scientists' who claim to work on reason but seem to be more about personal credibility and personal merit rather than noble prizes and reasoned thought.

I put this here for you to be able to have a say one of the more probable sciences of the future.