Cosmic web is not some exotic form of a spider’s web. It is the assumed large-scale structure of the universe with billions of galaxies forming a web like interconnected structure as shown in the NASA simulation above. Each dot there represents a galaxy. There can be seen voids where no galaxies exist and dense filaments where they form long strings.
This representation may be correct for the real created universe. However, what is not correct is its assumed origin. In order for the anti-Creator lambda cold dark matter (ΛCDM) model — the standard big bang model for the formation of the universe — to work, that is, form galaxies and clusters of galaxies, it needs enormous amounts of unknown stuff — fudge factors. It needs to be fudged by 95% unknowns to 5% knowns. And that is being generous.
A new cosmology paper is discussed in this ScienceAlert article: Dark Energy May Not Exist: Something Stranger Might Explain The Universe.
This is exactly what I have been saying all along. But perhaps for different reasons.
Cosmology is underdetermined. No matter how much evidence you gather, only observational evidence, you can never exclude all possible models from explaining that same data. So cosmology is rife with new models grasping at straws to explain what is observed.
In every case when the cosmologists come up with a new idea, it only ever might explain or could explain. You can never exclude some other possible explanations. This new idea presented there is just one more ‘could explain’ idea.
It is just more scratching on paper.
Using the type Ia supernovae as a standard candle they make new analysis with a model where time varies across the higher and lower densities of the galaxies in the cosmic web. As an aside, the type Ia supernovae are not as standard, that is, all of the same intrinsic brightness, as you might be led to believe. A lot of fudging goes on there too.
Their reasoning is that due to the higher or lower gravitational fields, from where there is more mass in the filaments or less mass in the voids, clocks tick slower or faster and this effect is misinterpreted in the standard big bang model. Therefore they conclude the ΛCDM model is wrong and should be replaced with the new timescape cosmology model.
But this is far worse than arguing over how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. Why? It still assumes an expanding big bang universe. I have shown that the evidence for expansion is equivocal. See Is the Universe Really Expanding — the Evidence Revisited. So that means unless the issue of expansion is settled, you cannot move beyond that.
But there are some honest admissions here.
The standard model of cosmology does a pretty good job of explaining the Universe – provided we fudge the numbers a bit. There doesn’t seem to be enough mass to account for the gravitational effects we observe, so we invented an invisible placeholder called dark matter.
There also seems to be a strange force that counteracts gravity, pushing the cosmos to expand at accelerating rates. We don’t know what it is yet, so in the same spirit we dubbed it dark energy.
ScienceAlert, January 3, 2025 (my emphases added)
It does a pretty bad job if they have to fudge the numbers by 95% fudge to only 5% non-fudge. That is not “a bit”.
The pie graph shown above tells you the proportions of totally fictitious stuff. I am told fudge taste very sweet, well, that pie would be sickening with 95% fudge.
And they are correct — dark matter is a placeholder, and dark energy is a strange force because it does not exist.
These statements are an admission that they do not understand the structure of the cosmos. They do not understand it because they deny the Creator and have invented their own creator from their own imaginations.
This time, the astronomers say they’ve found “very strong evidence in favor of timescape over ΛCDM.” This suggests a potential need to rethink the foundations of cosmology.
Two theoretical models are compared in their quality of fit to type Ia supernovae data. Neither model is correct but this shows the underdetermined nature of cosmology.
Nevertheless this leads them to state they need to rethink the foundations of cosmology. I agree. They need to abandon the false idea that the universe evolved out of a big bang.
“Dark energy is a misidentification of variations in the kinetic energy of expansion, which is not uniform in a Universe as lumpy as the one we actually live in,” says David Wiltshire, a physicist at the University of Canterbury.
“The research provides compelling evidence that may resolve some of the key questions around the quirks of our expanding cosmos. With new data, the Universe’s biggest mystery could be settled by the end of the decade.”
These are more admissions that they do not have it right. But they have hope that the “quirks” and the “biggest mystery” could be explained by the end of only 5 more years.
Well, what about these “quirks” — 20 Big Bang Busting Bloopers?
All of those listed unresolved problems are still unresolved 8 years later, except now they claim that they may have resolved the Dark Energy mystery with this new research.
The “quirk of the expanding cosmos” is a major roadblock. The universe is more likely to be static and not expanding at all. That in itself is a massive problem for an expanding universe.
And the “Universe’s biggest mystery” Dark Energy — the biggest fudge factor — would easily be resolved by abandoning any form of a big bang model because the universe did not expand out of a singularity but was created essentially as we observe it today. No big bang means no need for the “Universe’s biggest mystery”.
Besides the Dark Matter fudge is not just needed in the large-scale structure (as shown in pie chart above) but on every scale in the universe. Why is Dark Matter Everywhere in the Cosmos? It follows that an invisible god had to be invented because the starting premise is wrong. Read Is Dark Matter the Unknown God? Dark matter (an unknown god) is not needed when you trust the Creator.
Free Subscribers
Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Free Subscriber and be notified by email. Just put your email address in the box at the bottom of your screen.
You’ll get an email each time we publish a new article. It is quick and easy to do and totally free. You only need do it once.
Premium Subscribers
Subscribe to our Newsletters as a Premium Subscribers at $5 USD/month or $30 USD/year (you choose).
Paid Premium Subscribers will get exclusive access to certain content I publish, which I expect to be about 4 exclusive posts per month. That will only cost you a cup of coffee per month.
Also you’ll get access to download, for free, a PDF of my book Apocalypse Now. You can download it from a Premium members only post here.
And now you’ll get exclusive access to the chapters (in their initial draft form) to my new book with working title “The Physics of Creation”; plus eventually a PDF of the final compiled book.
This is how you can support my work. I have been publishing this website for 10 years now and up to 2024 I never asked for any support.
Press the button “Premium” on the front page to find a list of Premium content. Over time that list will grow. Thanks so much to all supporters.
At a minimum, please join as a Free Subscriber. It’ll cost you nothing. It may also help me beat the shadow banning of some posts.
Bible Science Forum 
Leave a comment