Lay persons are interfering with opposing schools of certified silly physicists; sort of like alternately attempting to ressurect the debunked Piltdown Man, or install a new one.
New philogistic installations for as many recently discovered phenomena are in compulsory vogue today, long before the newly orbiting observatories and sensors, and moreso ever since and continuingly.
Cause and Effect has become a school of observing an effect and fabricating a cause. This has happened successfully throughout the history and evolution of physics, of course.
Whereas,the vocabulary of words and mathematics has fairly transcended the business of understanding the existential reality they're subjectively and anthropomorphically tailored for.
Although it's established that a larger vocabulary empowers conceptual creativity and general understanding - on the other hand, mathematical and linguistic nomenclature are nullified when their practitioners literally don't know what the flock they're talking about.
It gets particularly surreal if the awry wordsmith refuses to admit he doesn't understand what he's talking about - invents and practices words for.
A lot of people not too long ago knew for sure we had gone too far around the bend with Word-Spinning, Politically Correct, Charm, Strangeness and Quarks.
It would be an interesting and educational project to list (in black & white holes?) all of the corroborately super strung out, darkly materialized vocabulary recently invented - say, in the past thirty years; for (Heisenberg's) which (Principle) there (of) is (Indeterminacy) no specific comprehension.
Someone who was probably wiser than Your's Truly, once said:
"Limitless are the number of apparently reasonable conclusions, that are otherwise based on a completely false premise."
I would morph that to a measurably increasing propensity to innovate false premises (Pop pink smoke & cyberHype) upon which apparently limitless reasonable conclusions can be based: squared.
How can anyone be corrected in a subject upon which there is little or no understanding? That's a secure platform from which to fish for - and catch - any number of thoroughly smoked mackeral.
Yes. 'Physicist' can indeed by very silly.
(Likewise, so too can be mackeral.)
Hamilton Beach may yet collect the entire genre of ever accumulating ad hoc ala carte's and ex parte 'today's special's': for permanent side orders, only humanly being flash-frozen on 'frappe'.
It is notable that several of the better known Eastern religions do indeed allude to a spatially (and physically) expanding universe, decades and millenia before Western Civilization's 'science' discovered the spatially expanding universe (1927 - '32 - Sylpher/Hubble).
On the other hand, they say that Jonah was swallowed by a whale, and Methuslah lived 900 years, and, it ain't necessarily so.
The things that you're liable to read in the Bible (or the Talmud, Koran, Talmud, Kabal, Upanishads, Baghadvagita or Carl Sagen's COSMOS), just ain't necessarily so...
- Equus (Aka, Etceteras)