Indeed! Science works by proposing explanations publishing the research finding supporting the claim and having others research the proposition again. No pontifical pronouncement or political comment can change or detract from this effort, though as has been pointed out CSIRO may be discouraged from making public comment on findings that may show doubt of political party lines. Even on a Country lines when it comes to war, outside the provenance of CSIRO. (most likely given as a ministerail to the media, no data added.) So yes some censoring seems on the statements made to be occuring. Time, a short time will tell whether King Canute is speaking truth or not.

My interest in this topic stems from the fact that we are all scientists because during our lives we are presented with one problem after another. Each day, we concern ourselves with cause and effect and each day, we speculate about the reasons for the actions that surround us. If we depend on finding a relationship between cause and effect, we demonstrate a belief in causality ......... so whilst not a professional scientist, I do find it part of my everyday life and we are all part of the environment in which science is performed.

Ever since I heard about this "big bang" origin of the universe some fifty years ago, I have asked myself this same question. How can the universe begin from nothing? Even as a twelve year old this didn't seem like science. We have this origin of the universe taken seriously by most scientists, popularized by the media and accepted by most of the public and yet it is plainly stooooopid. We gat all manner of silly stuff about how the universe is expanding which is also plainly stooooopid. What's it expanding into ...... itself? Surely this "theory" would have to represent the biggest embarrassment to twentieth century science.

In fifty or more years, not one skerrick of evidence has been found. So where billions of dollars and countless reputations are invested we have this question of why? Then, how reflective is this of many other areas of science?

So Kieran, what is the sensible explanation for the existence of the universe?

Perhaps the only sensible question to ask is about our word "nothing" or "nothingness". i.e. Has "nothingness" ever existed and could this be nuthing more than a human idealisation?

Perhaps science could try to create a "nothingness" but all attempts to create a perfect vacuum so far seem to fail. (Although on the other hand we have teddies (gods) who can create a perfect vacuum in the heads of a lot of people.)

The next time we hear someone mention the age of the universe, or the expanding universe or the "big bang" theory could someone kindly ask how everything we call the universe could come from zilch. I haven't heard any scientist who we expect to understand causality, explain this point. ... ( and what is more they cannot and prefer not to, anyway.)

Yes. Also in Australia. I personally, got a letter from a senior Fedral science-bureaucrat saying that if I didn't stop writing sceptical letters to politicians about the advice they were getting on greenhouse, I would be exposed in the media. Also when I asked ATSE to provide a forum where both sides of the climate change issue could be presented, the written response said something like (I haven't looked it up) "to have a debate with two sides would be a corruption of the scientific process". Of course there is scientific censorship in Australia too. Look at the hard time our 2005 Nobel Laureates (Warren and Marshall) had getting acceptance for their discovery that stomach ulcers were not caused by environmental factors (stress, spicy food) as generally believed. Instead the cause was a bacterium, and ulcers could be readily cured by antibiotics. In stomach ulcers, and in continental drift, the basic instinct of scientists was to prevent the advancement of scientific understanding. You see it now in the disagreement between the mainstream who say people drive climate, and contrarians like me who say its the Sun.

A “sensible explanation for the existence of the universe?”, is that its here. I doubt that the big bang theory will suffice in a few years. We are close to finding the doors between more advanced dimensions and maybe parallel worlds, when that happens we will see our universe from a better perspective. It may well be that this universe is just a part of much larger and more advanced dimensions

Most scientific “muzzling” occurs because of commercial vested interests and political interests. As to global warming, well does it matter why our climate is changing as well as the psychological make up of humans. What matters is that something is making changes to our world and we either find what it is an take action, or we argue to appease the infantile minds who want to be right, no matter what and get nowhere.

Its the technological advances that will help us cope, that are being muzzled. Because they go against the vested economic interest of political parties who are the lackies of monopoly fossil energy suppliers.