Site Section Links
The "Dance" of Mainstream Astronomy
A recent article from Science Daily (Aug 22, 2008) at
is a prime example of the misleading and obfuscating "dance" by mainstream astronomy over the origin of stars and the nature of star power source. The article admits that some changes need to be made:
"The systematics of celestial bodies apparently needs to be revised. Researchers at the Argelander Institute of Astronomy of the University of Bonn have discovered that brown dwarfs need to be treated as a separate class in addition to stars and planets. The systematics of celestial bodies apparently needs to be revised. Researchers at the Argelander Institute of Astronomy of the University of Bonn have discovered that brown dwarfs need to be treated as a separate class in addition to stars and planets."
This article misses the boat in two
There are many examples of binary stars that are extremely closely spaced. There is also an upper limit to the separation distance of `normal' binary stars too. So what? This is obfuscation. There are also many closely spaced `giant gas planets' and normal stars (like the Sun and Jupiter). So what?
"..there are hardly any mixed pairs consisting of suns and brown dwarfs – far fewer than expected."
Expected by whom? Astronomers whose theories are falling apart? Our Sun has four giant gas planets. Is there a problem with that?
"Despite this contradiction the astronomic community has previously stuck to the theory of a joint origin."
Do they not `stick to' all their crumbling theories? Have they EVER announced they were previously wrong on anything?
"Since almost all stars are born in star clusters,…"
This is not supported by ANY observational evidence. Since many
(almost all) stars are observed to be in twisted strings, it is more
likely that they are BORN in those strings. Globular clusters are
"Thus there are presumably three quite different celestial bodies: planets, brown dwarfs and stars."
This is what they have always maintained. There is nothing
about this. There is evidence all stars (dwarf and otherwise) are
members of a continuum, just as there is no inherent difference
between comets and asteroids.
"Until now, brown dwarfs had been merely regarded as stars which were below normal size. However, they may well be stellar 'miscarriages.'"
Stellar miscarriages? Cute – but no information content.
"Stars often occur in pairs, which dance around each other."
As Earth `dances around' the Sun?
"…a system consisting of three embryonic stars disintegrates due to the mutual attraction of masses,.."
What is an `embryonic star'?
They seem to love such "twinkle-toes" phraseology. Carl Sagan used to revel in this stuff. So did Mr. Rogers when he talked (down) to his audience. Mr. Rogers was a TV personality – he had a show for kiddies. It was at about the same intellectual level as this article.