The truth about the mainstream cosmologist establishment

No.

Even the looniest of creationists beleives the Grand Canyon was formed by water erosion. Some think it was formed in a few days by water erosion.

This is a long-running canard, characteristic of those who unquestioningly swallow what they want to believe.Arp is employed at a premier physics and astrophysics institute (Max-Planck-Institut fr Astrophysik), gets plenty of telescope time, and continues to publish (see MPA Scientific Preprints issued in 2004 and MPA Scientific Preprints issued in 2003 and X-ray Emitting QSOs Ejected from Arp 220).See also Quasars and the Cosmic Distance Scale.

I don't know. What reasons or evidence do you have to believe that it's true?

What makes you think he had to leave the U.S.? There are many scientists who would jump at the opportunity to work at the Max Plank Institute! Your parochiality is showing.As is the reliability of your sources.

You are assuming that Arp is a bad scientist. Well, he's not the greatest, that's for sure, and he's made some mistakes of fact and some errors of judgement; but he's done some good work and appears to be continuing to do some good work.It's also possible (just off the top of my head, and I have no idea if it's true) that the Max Plank Institute is purposefully employing him to ensure that alternative viewpoints are investigated and heard. The "monolithic and dogmatic" scientific establishment is a myth.

On talk.origins I and others spent over a year discussing isochron dating with a lady who had a laudable facility for generating excellent questions and fresh viewpoints, and a regrettable religious blind spot that prevented her from accepting or even acknowledging the answers to her questions.We spent a couple of months on a sticking point that turned out to be her inability to accept or understand why five divided by zero is undefined rather than being five. I think we eventually persuaderd her but it's possible that we didn't.