I'm thinking I stole that from some of the science versus pseudo science debates that seem to be growing.

I actually come at the subject from more of a political, sociological perspective, in terms of looking at physics as a way to make sense of social behavior. Then I find the herd instinct in physics is every bit as strong, if not stronger, given the cultural discipline all those years of study require. The walls of the ruts get very deep.

Another example I try bringing up is one I posted about here;

https://medium.com/@johnbrodixmerrymanjr/the-confessions-of-a-cosmic-heretic-5cd4c044b8ea

Short form is that when they realized cosmic redshift increases proportional to distance in all directions, it makes us appear to be at the center of the expansion/universe, so the very first patch to Big Bang Theory was to change it from an expansion in space, to an expansion of space, because spacetime!

Which totally ignores the central premise of General Relativity, that the speed of light is measured as a constant in any frame. Obviously if the light is being redshifted, intergalactic light is not constant to intergalactic space. The speed of light would have to increase, as space expands, in order to remain constant. Instead, two metrics are being derived from the same light, one based on the speed and the other based on the spectrum. Since the speed is still being treated as the denominator, ie more lightyears, that makes it the "ruler."

The sociological aspect is that I've spent years bringing this up in quite a few discussions and there is no inclination to consider the very basic logic of it. About the only effort to refute it has been to say the light is only measured locally, while the universe expands globally. To which I point out it has to expand locally, in order to expand globally, the balloon expands under the inchworm too.

The fact remains that doppler effect is due to increasing/decreasing distance in stable space. The train moving way doesn't stretch the tracks and in this case, the speed of light is the tracks.

Now I'm the first to admit complex math is beyond me, though I have a great deal of respect for professionalism, as in my world, you get hurt, or worse, if you don't know what you are doing. Yet this is not complicated! These people spend their lives digging through the most abstract and complex mathematical puzzles anyone can dream up, but it seems this intense focus blinds them to the bigger picture, in this case, very basic math.

Suffice to say, I view all the work built on it as highly suspect, but it's a swamp I'm not willing to fruitlessly invest my limited time into peeling apart, other than the occasional comment.