An Open Letter to the Scientific Community originally signed by 250 scientists: many more have added their names since.
Published in New Scientist 2004
This is the opening paragraph.
"The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed; inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory. In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, raise serious questions about the validity of the underlying theory."
Further on the letter states:
"Even observations are now interpreted through this biased filter, judged right or wrong depending on whether or not they support the big bang. So discordant data on red shifts, lithium and helium abundances, and galaxy distribution, among other topics, are ignored or ridiculed. This reflects a growing dogmatic mindset that is alien to the spirit of free scientific inquiry.
Today, virtually all financial and experimental resources in cosmology are devoted to big bang studies. Funding comes from only a few sources, and all the peer-review committees that control them are dominated by supporters of the big bang. As a result, the dominance of the big bang within the field has become self-sustaining, irrespective of the scientific validity of the theory."
The Big Bang is another “fact” we are all supposed to believe along with Evolution according to the narrative of any natural history program. These theories are clearly stated as being fact. The Big Bang theory though, has a few chinks in its armour, from a large swathe of the scientific community.
Below shows part of a letter expressing the doubts many scientists have, about the validity of the Big Bang Theory.
