I am thinking of the following title title for my book on the Big Bang Cosmology fraud:


This is actually not my coinage. It occurs in the following quotation from Noam Chomsky:

Moral cowardice and intellectual corruption are the concomitants of unchallenged privilege.

The “unchallenged privilege” in my case refers to the fact that the physics establishment is immune from all scrutiny. They have put appropriate safeguards in place. Only insiders are allowed to criticize. Outsiders are not entitled. You better believe it! A high-level military man who was the director of a National Laboratory once tried to take them on. What happened? Pentagon swiftly pulled him away and gave him a desk job somewhere else. So, if you know what’s good for you…

The “intellectual curruption” in my case refers to the lead players who are setting the direction of physics. These people make the John Mather Phenomenon possible. I once heard the following description of a crooked person: “He is sooo crooked that he has to screw on his underwear.” Graphic enough?

The “moral cowardice” in my case refers to the rest of the physics establishment. These people, who are bound to have a conscience like the rest of us, will not speak against their leaders. These are the people who give life to the John Mather Phenomenon. The only example of moral courage in this respect that I know of is the Nobel prizewinning physicist Julian Schwinger. Late in life, he was pursuing cold fusion. The physics establishment would not let him publish his papers in their glossy journals. Schwinger then resigned from the American Physical Society, and wrote:

The pressure for conformity is enormous. I have experienced it in editors’ rejection of submitted papers, based on venomous criticism of anonymous referees. The replacement of impartial reviewing by censorship will be the death of science.

The subtitle I am thinking for the book:

Physicists and NASA’s Big Bang Cosmology fraud

Now, one of the cleverest safeguards they have installed against outside criticism works like this: Suppose you are a non-academic or fringe or jobless or retired person who wants to criticize an entrenched establishment idea. You start to raise your concern in some public arena – the Internet say – and rage forth. They will ignore you completely. Now, however, your cousin Peavine Jeffreys is a US Sentor. You prevail upon him to get the establishment to pay attention. What will they do? They will be all sweetness and honey: “Of course we will take a very serious look at your idea. Just write up your paper and submit it to one of our refereed journals. We will extend to you all due process.”

This is the Kiss of Death. This invitation is equivalent to “Come into my parlor….” What are they doing here? In the first place, they are removing you from the public arena, and thus eliminating a nuisance. They are taking you into a dimly lit private backroom and administering to you due process. Waterboarding? No, they are far more sophisticated than that.

Suppose that your scientific point is a valid one, and is couched adequately. But you may not be quite up on writing polished scientific papers; or framing your point with intricate equations and matrices; or supporting your claim with computations that require large computers and many years of time; etc. There will invariably be many such issues they can pounce on, and toss the ball back into your court. They will give you as many as three reports from anonymous referees, with kind and helpful suggestions. The editor will write a very kind cover letter, concluding: “We are awaiting your revised manuscript.”

And so it will go. They will make you run through the hoops. Your paper will never see the light of day. Cousin Jeffreys will see that you have been given the due process, and more. So he will withdraw his further support. If you now go back to the public arena, you are back exactly where you started. Only, your hair is greyer. Was it worth it?

Now back to the John Mather fraud. You may hear this same point from the establishment: “He (me) has not published his criticism in one of our refereed journals. So we cannot respond.” But in this case, we need not even go there. Don’t fall into that trap. There is nothing for me to publish. The issue is crystal clear. One does not even need a scientific background to see this. A greengrocer or a fishmonger can grasp this just fine. The two-part issue is this:

A. NASA launched a satellite and told us exactly how it should perform in order for them to verify the Big Bang Cosmology. This is in print.

B. NASA told us that the satellite did not perform accordingly. Not even close. This is in print.

So there can be no discovery, by their own documented criteria. Period. Done and done.

The incontrovertible evidence of science fraud has already been published. There is nothing for me to publish. Do not let them sell you their crooked Bill of Goods. Do not let them cleverly obfuscate a clear case of fraud with a great deal of scientific jiggery pokery and procedural oxdung.

A fraud is a fraud is a fraud. It is entirely irrelevant who exposed it and how he exposed it and what arena he exposed it in and what he was smoking when he did so.

By the way, I do not have any illusions about this book selling at all. The purpose is documentation. Since I will self-publish the book, I am not dependent on anyone or anything for this project.


Leave a reply relevant to the above post.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: