The Church and Dead Ends of Science

My concern about the Big Bang theory being adopted as Christian dogma is that the theory itself is as secular and spiritually misleading as any of the current/ancient pagan belief systems that venerate the four seasons. [e.g. Fraser, The Golden Bough]

In the big bang theory we are being led to venerate the cosmic seasons, the concept of birth (bang), maturation and necessary death of the cosmos in the 'big crunch'/heat death.

We and Our Father are more than such stardust, more than accretions of chemistry and physics that die.

Alternative scientific theories regarding cosmology, even known scientific theories such as chaos theory, Teslas theory of environmental energy (an electrogravity theory that flies craft without the handicaps of physics theories that produce handicaps and paradoxes, or, free energy realities where a quarter of a million US motorists break the known laws of physics every morning when they start their hydrocell car up, or, plasma research from 'the big bang never happened' http://bigbangneverhappened.org/ etc all lead us away from the endlessly mortal vision of cosmic death and depletion and entropy by (star)dust and big bang.

It is Christian teaching that the/this cosmos will pass away - roll up like an old cloak, but the love of Christ takes us into eternity because His word will never pass away .. nor indeed those who live in His word ...

unlike the stardust of our (big crunch)ing cosmos.

The Big Bang and its advocates in Christs church appear to be leading the Christian flock towards a vision of cosmic death.

If God is merely the materials of the Big bang - then it could be implied that God dies too at the big crunch.

The main problem with Theologians operating as scientists appears to be with their unquestioning and trusting allegiance to a scientific peer group with vested political and industrial interests who are prejudiced against the data, observations and empirical demonstrations that refute their long held views.

In the real world where the scientific method was truly practised - there would be no Big bang theory - there would be no constant revisions, no changing of the goalposts - its a theory that should have been discarded as it has become falsified.

I should point out that for any scientific theory to be logically refuted and automatically discarded only ONE refutation is sufficient.

[e.g. Popper, K, 'Conjectures and Refutations', London, 1962]

I must admit to being very concerned that the Catholic church is entering into the fruitless political theatre and debate that 'public' science in the 21st century has become for mankind. In so doing we legitimise the elite cover stories for materialism, and scientific fictions and fantasies perhaps blinding our brothers and sisters to the truth that the sciences operated by the elite are paradox free, unlimited, and different from what we are allowed to know.


Frank Ferguson writes :

'...It is known to me with an extremely high  degree of certainty from my father Frank H. Ferguson who supervised  over 30 Ph D's working under him at Lockheed  in early seventies on inter-stellar travel that what you call "unquestioning and trusting allegiance to a scientific peer group with vested political and industrial interests who are prejudiced against the data, observations and empirical demonstrations that refute their long held views." IS THE MAIN PROBLEM with theologians and physicists like Father Spitzer and Catholic physicist Stephen Barr.

Is it merely a problem of being "unquestioning" or does Truth need to set Father Spitzer and Dr Stephen Barr free.  Could Father Spitzer in this day of Internet researching his Ph D on Big Bang have never come across Eric Lerner's  1992 "Big Bang never happened" .

In New Proofs of God Fr Spitzer does not reference Lerner -- not even in a footnote.  Why not. Is Lerner's assertion that Big Bang never happened so devoid of reason and evidence that Lerner does not merit at least a footnote  in the Proofs made to demonstrate that Father Spitzer has made a comprehensive review of Big Bang theory.

  What of the eminent physicists on Father Spitzer's committee for his dissertation and orals?  Had not even one on Father Spitzer's orals committee heard of Lerner and the Big-Bang-never-happening  when there were headlines to this effect in the Washington Post. ....'

This is I suppose an excellent illustration of why the church should stay away from from potentially bogus scientific theories like the Big Bang - as there is always a risk that they could be very wrong given that the whole paradigm of public physics is built upon central PARADOXES like the quantum (particle wave duality) paradox.
Einstein never achieved a physical recognition of or description of unity in his paradox orientated vision of physics so why would the church endorse academic procrastination based on these incomplete ideas - these foundations of sand ?