, you should look up what ad hominen
means. I'm attacking the argument, not the person. For all I know, that Donald Scott is an upstanding guy and I'd love to have a glass of wine with him.
But let's go on.
Alfvén made some groundbreaking work in plasma physics, and was rightfully recognized for it. His cosmology, however, is rather shaky. It's a classic case of a man with a hammer: everything looks like a nail. He did some great discovery in plasma physics, and suddenly plasma physics is the fundamental law of nature and everything derives from it. It explains (not really) large scale structures, galaxy evolution, rotation curves, star formations, quasars, ect. Pretty convenient, and very self-gratulatory.
Also, his work doesn't add up at all with the cosmic microwave background radiation, which asymmetries trace beautifully with the inflation scenario. There is no better proof of the Big Bang theory. It is really the smoking gun, and the matter is pretty much settled. (And let's not get into the "plasma scaling" crap: if you want bad science, look no further). "Plasma cosmology" looks like a the pet theory of a person that really, really
likes electrodynamics, but nothing more. I understand its appeal to electrical engineers, tho.
At least, it doesn't sound like the ravings of a "moon hoax" conspiracy theory lunatic, like that Crothers fellow.
If it's not extremely esoteric and accepted by the "big names" in astrophysics, then it must be worthless.
it if the universe was simpler, less esoteric, and more understandable. It would make my job much, much easier. But I was humble enough to realize that my desires have zero impact on the nature of the cosmos. So I rolled up my sleeves, and started to work.