English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Astronomy can never be a hard core physics discipline, because the Universeoffers no control experiment, i.e. with no independent checks it is bound to behighly ambiguous and degenerate. Thus e.g. while superluminal motion can beexplained by Special Relativity. data on the former can never on their own beused to establish the latter. This is why traditionally astrophysicists havebeen content with (and proud of) their ability to use known physical laws andprocesses established in the laboratory to explain celestial phenomena.Cosmology is not even astrophysics: all the principal assumptions in this fieldare unverified (or unverifiable) in the laboratory, and researchers are quitecomfortable with inventing unknowns to explain the unknown. How then could,after fifty years of failed attempt in finding dark matter, the fields of darkmatter {\it and now} dark energy have become such lofty priorities in astronomyfunding, to the detriment of all other branches of astronomy? I demonstrate inthis article that while some of is based upon truth, at least just as much of$\Lambda$CDM cosmology has been propped by a paralyzing amount of propagandawhich suppress counter evidence and subdue competing models. The recent WMAP3paper of Spergel et al (2007) will be used as case in point on selectivecitation. I also show that when all evidence are taken into account, two of thecompeting models that abolish dark energy and/or dark matter do not trailbehind $\Lambda$CDM by much. Given all of the above, I believe astronomy is nolonger heading towards a healthy future, unless funding agencies re-think theirmaster plans by backing away from such high a emphasis on groping in the dark.

$\Lambda$CDM cosmology: how much suppression of credible evidence, and does the model really lead its competitors, using all evidence?