This is a topic that really frustrates me. Both sides make valid (non-technical, character-based) attacks on the other. On one extreme there is the textbook f

This is a topic that really frustrates me. Both sides make valid (non-technical, character-based) attacks on the other. On one extreme there is the textbook fringe pseudoscientist who calls out groupthink but constantly falls into fallacies rather than focusing on explaining empirical observations with the simplest and most accurate way possible. On the other extreme there is the career pseudoscientist who calls out the poor form of the fringe while not bothering to apply the appropriate level of scientific rigor to them either. It's unfortunate simply how much ego is involved in this area. I'm not a plasma physicist. I'm not a cosmologist. I can just see when the idyllic scientific method is being short circuited. For a quick toe-dipping in to Alfvein cosmology: check out the sci-hub for the 1986 IEEE Peratt paper "Evolution of the Plasma Universe: II. The Formation of Systems of Galaxies". I'm not saying all elements of one model should be thrown out. Let's go one mystery at a time. How does galaxy evolution sound? Forget even trying to be certain of the Big Bang or alternatives until that's nailed down.