The Theory of Scientific Evidence.


Scientific evidence is theoretical because it depends on the historical first principle of science. Biblical physics uses different kinds of evidence because it defines matter and time differently. The scientific theory of evidence is the experimental system. Experimental evidence is certified by identical results anywhere, anytime. This is a law-like assumption yet it is speculative for these reasons.

(1) Scientists use operationally defined units without regard to whether the thing measured is an actuality. Atomic clocks are the primary instruments for scientific measuring, yet no clock ever isolated any time. Clocks can only compare the rate of complex, irreducible processes. Clocks are incapable of comparing the rate of past seconds with present ones, except in the distant heavens. Atomic clocks shining from distant galaxies clock minuscule rates compared to modern atoms. Since their theory of evidence is law-like, scientists belittle the visible information from billions of distant galaxies. They protect their theory of evidence with stories that have no visible support. They claim that distant galaxies are speeding away altering the received light by a Doppler shift. Yet if Doppler is the cause, the most-distant galaxies would need to move faster than light. So scientists change the story. It was space (the vacuum) that stretched the light as it traveled through the void. No experiment ever detected properties that belong to a vacuum itself. (A vacuum is an absence of anything). No one ever detected light stretching as it passed through a void. Scientists make up invisible properties for the vacuum becauyse of their theory of evidence.

(2) The scientific theory of evidence depends on their first principle, that the properties of matter are not emergent. Experimental evidence presupposes that what they measure is not changing-itself. If all matter is changing with age, then both sides of a balance scale could change by equal amounts. One cannot measure changelessness without presupposing that the properties of matter are unchanging. Indeed, atomic clocks depend on the assumption that atoms are perpetual motion machines. Then they integrate this assumption with their mathematical theories and other units of measurement.


(3) Observations or complex measurements are rarely the focus of published scientific reports. Instead they concentrate on theoretical implications. For example, the hydrogen light from an ancient galaxy is observed at seven times the wavelength of local hydrogen. They publish as fact the theoretical implications: billions of light years and cosmological redshift. Yet a child can see the differences in the spectra of ancient light compared with modern light. Scientist simply use their faith in perpetual motion atoms to solve the history of the universe circularly with perpetual motion atoms.  They do not actually think, atoms are perpetual motion machines.  They simply assume it because their system of measurement and mathematics was constructed on the assumption that matter does not change-itself.  If all atoms were changing relationally, they could not measure such changes with their operationally defined units. They also could not model relational changes with mathematics. 

How can we know the truth if we cannot measure it locally?  It is not just the light spectra from the past that change with age.  Billions of galaxies at many ranges grew from tiny naked clumps packed with stars to huge, diffuse, dusty, growth spirals. This is visible because we compare how primordial galaxies change their shapes at many ranges all the way up to the present.  The visible history of the universe demonstrates that the properties of matter are always changing relationally. The visible history of the universe invalidates every principle and law of scientific physics with optics.  This is doubtless why scientists reduce this visible evidence to the status of non evidence.  Instead they propose a universe that is 99% invisible, filled with vacuum processes and invisible matter.  Their inability to accept what is visible strongly suggests that the scientific theory of evidence is false. 

Return to godsriddle home page
Previous essay on biblical physics
Next essay of biblical physics
 This document is under a Creative Commons License by Victor McAllister. What does that mean?
Last edited October 23, 2008