Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KamikazeArchon t1_j79m7f8 wrote

Reply to comment by 7sv3n7 in Serious question by Unable_Region7300

That is not what "theory" means in science. Science does not deal with 100% correctness in any circumstance, so there's no need for a separate word to describe that. "Theory" in this context roughly means "model". For example, the "theory of gravity" doesn't mean "we're not sure that gravity is real", it means "here's our model for how gravity works".

JWST is not producing anything that would dispute the basic premise of the Big Bang model - the idea that everything was hot and dense. It is fine-tuning various details of it.

5

7sv3n7 t1_j79mn79 wrote

Well there are some scientist fron what ive read disagreeing with that so...

−5

jeffroddit t1_j79n271 wrote

I'm a scientist, and I'm saying that you are made of wonder bread so.....

Some scientists can say anything and have zero effect on science.

5

MSY2HSV t1_j79oe8y wrote

Source? I’ll genuinely consider any legitimate source you provide, but without a source to consider I’m going to presume, as a scientist, that it’s just nut jobs trying to make noise for attention. From every bit of scientific evidence that I, a scientist, have seen, there’s nothing from the James Webb scope that disputes the Big Bang.

3

7sv3n7 t1_j7a2jzd wrote

Ive seen articles from my feed saying that there is more doubt than before, I def am not making it up or claiming that ive come to this decision based on info from it, just regurgitating what ive read.

Also agree with u it more than likely is just click bait so guess I shouldn't have said anything. Hate the downvotes just for saying something I read, not wrote

1