steven hawking: i was wrong !!!, page-21

re: .steven hawking: for goblins
Goblin, you mentioned the Hubble site as evidence for black holes. That hubble telescope site has plenty of nonsense ..... expanding universes, gravity sucking, fantasy black holes and arbitrary coloured pictures not real photographs.

This is a disgrace to the man Hubble whose good work has been distorted to fit some theory ....... promoted by the cocksure powerful US christian lobby no doubt. This is where the huge funding comes from and one of the main pointers as to why I post on this topic. We are not getting science but a religion dressed up to look like science.

A key point in this is Hubble himself who in actual fact, was a life-long doubter of velocity being the cause of cosmological redshifts. And, his linear law of redshifts applied to a non expanding universe. Here is one of many examples from his writings:

“Since the corresponding velocity of recession is the same fraction of the velocity of light, the nebulae in the most distant cluster observed, if they are actually receding, will appear 13 per cent fainter than they would appear if they were stationary. The difference is small but, fortunately, the measures can be made with fair accuracy. The results may be stated simply. If the nebulae are stationary, the law of red shifts is sensibly linear; red shifts are a constant multiple of distances. In other words, each unit of light path contributes the same amount of red shift. On the other hand, if the nebulae are receding, and the dimming factors are applied, the scale of distances is altered, and the law of red shifts is no longer linear.”
(See: Edwin Hubble, "The Problem of the Expanding Universe," American Scientist, Vol. )

ALSO
“
Particle physicist Steven Weinberg and astrophysicist Martin Rees had this to say in reply to questions by readers of New Scientist:  “Popular accounts, and even astronomers, talk about expanding space. But how is it possible for space, which is utterly empty, to expand? How can “nothing” expand? ‘Good question,’ says Weinberg. ‘The answer is: space does not expand. Cosmologists sometimes talk about expanding space—but they should know better.’ Rees agrees wholeheartedly. ‘Expanding space is a very unhelpful concept.’ ”
“
ALSO
“
Hubble and Humason worked together at the Mount Wilson Observatory during all those years of their great discovery. Nevertheless, Humason’s name was slowly but consistently disappearing in publications, and all the credit for their work is now given to Hubble alone. Max von Laue’s History of Physics (1950), pays tribute to Hubble only and does not even mention Humason. Both names appear together in the American Institute of Physics Handbook (1972), but in Asimov’s Biographical Encyclopedia of Science and Technology (1982) there is Hubble only. Humason is not mentioned in all publicity around the recent launchings into space of the Hubble Telescopes, and of the discoveries made with them (they were neither planned nor worked on by Hubble; he died long before, in 1953). Starting with his 1931 paper, Humason opposed the falsifications of the physical Hubble-Humason (H-H) law and the mispresentation of the H-H redshift as due to the Doppler Effect. The removal of Humason from the Hall of Fame in science and from public memory, is it a vendetta of the "scientific community" ?
“