The failure of Jason Lisle's ASC paradigm

[PdotdQ]

Let me address your answer to @swamidass’s questions:

@ABC

From the paper referenced by r_speir, Lisle actually uses distant galaxies as support for his model:

“Indeed spiral galaxies nearby strongly resemble those found in the Hubble Deep Field—at the edge of our current knowledge of the universe. The spiral structure is clearly seen in both nearby and distant galaxies, suggesting that they are all roughly the same age as we see them now. This again confirms the ASC model. Even the amount of spiral wrapping seems to be about the same for nearby and very distant galaxies as we see them now—exactly as the ASC model predicts.”

This paragraph by Lisle (that by the way, has no reference at all, so we just have Lisle’s words for it) falsely stated that distant galaxies seem to be “about the same” with nearby galaxies.

This is ridiculous, given that a large portion of astronomy is on the study of the evolution of galaxies through cosmic time.

Just a few examples out of literally tens of thousands of papers studying the miriad differences of nearby and distant galaxies:

1. The morphology of nearby galaxies are on average different from faraway galaxies ([astro-ph/0109358] The Morphological Evolution of Galaxies)
2. The velocity dispersion of nearby galaxies are on average different from faraway galaxies ([1107.0972] Redshift Evolution of the Galaxy Velocity Dispersion Function)
3. The star formation rate of nearby galaxies are on average different from faraway galaxies ([1207.6105] The Average Star Formation Histories of Galaxies in Dark Matter Halos from z=0-8)

The fact that faraway galaxies are on average different from nearby galaxies is such a basic astronomical concept that I am confused how a self-proclaimed astronomer such as Jason Lisle can say otherwise.

Seriously, this stuff is in freshman textbooks!