There are many flaws with your reasoning here. The most glaring is your assertion that just because something has never been detected or measured makes it impossible.
The obvious contrary possibility is that the tools to detect dark matter simply don’t exist or haven’t been built yet. History is littered with examples of this. Bacteria anyone?
You then go on to use the very kind of logic you are trying to fault the scientific community for using by arguing for a divine force as an alternate explanation.
Have you detected God? If so, how tall is he/she? How much does a God weigh anyhow?
Sorry - I know it’s hard to think about stuff like God and children in ways we weren’t raised to, but that doesn’t make those opinions we disagree with any less likely.
#grownostr
#thinkdangerously
#getoffended
The point made is that we are told that the Big Bang and Dark Matter are fact when the evidence does not say so. They keep having to add fudge factors to the Big Bang because the evidence doesn't match the theory nor the predictions made by the Big Bang Theory. Does any of this 100% disprove the Big Bang? No, it does not. Are there other theories that explain the evidence better without the fudge factors? Yes.
One point in the article is that we can't do true experimental science relating to Cosmology and therefore can't prove anything for certain. On the other hand some theories match the evidence better. The Big Bang and billions of years don't match the evidence best and therefore should definitely not be pushed as fact. Although I believe the Big Bang Theory is nonsense, if they pushed it as their preferred theory of many possible theories, I wouldn't have a problem with it or them. That is not what is done, though. They promote the Big Bang as fact and anyone who questions it at all is treated as a quack. That isn't science. That is tyranny. The flat Earthers and Earth-centric gallaxy proponents did the same. The Covid fearmongers did the same. The Global Warming fearmongers did the same. Silencing opposing views is the opposite of science.
There is no fact in science, only best guesses based on available evidence. Media often portrays scientific results as fact but media, as we know from so many other examples, is singularly stupid and looking out only for itself and its profits.
The entire basis of scientific reasoning is that there is always room for error and revision of even its most “sound” theories happens all the time. This is the singular advantage that it holds in my opinion over other “faith” based reasoning approaches.
In any event, thank you for explaining your position. I think it’s nice that even when we clearly disagree on something, we can respect each other as people.
Thread collapsed
What about the cosmic microwave background?
Thread collapsed
"... if they pushed (big bang) ... as their preferred theory of many possible theories, I wouldn't have a problem with it or them. That is not what is done, though. They promote the Big Bang as fact and anyone who questions it at all is treated as a quack. That isn't science. That is tyranny. The flat Earthers and Earth-centric gallaxy proponents did the same. The Covid fearmongers did the same. The Global Warming fearmongers did the same. Silencing opposing views is the opposite of science."
Well said @LiberyGal Science, facts and theory are not the agenda with the tyrants. Any opposition to their ideology is met with every trick in the book but not with reasoning, discussion and debate to find truth. I will no longer debate with anyone that is not at least agreeable with the premise that the only agenda is finding truth. It's a huge time saver. 😀
Thread collapsed
Thread collapsed
