Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 08:47:29 UTC No. 16168720

>>16168436
>Dark matter, for when the galaxies are spinning faster than they're supposed to
>Dark energy, for when space is expanding faster than it's supposed to
>Dark radiation, for when space isn't actually expanding the way we thought it would
>Dark antimatter, for when we need to explain why there is Dark matter
>Dark space, for when something else doesn't work out and we need an extra variable.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 09:46:27 UTC No. 16168755

>>16168720
And in 5 years they'll find that galaxies aren't spinning faster and the universe isn't expanding and it's all just a trick of light

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 10:07:57 UTC No. 16168770

>>16168436
You love to see it

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 19:42:35 UTC No. 16169489

>science : we dont know WHAT the fucks going on!

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 19:47:43 UTC No. 16169502

>>16168755
>and the universe isn't expanding
i would cum but no way

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 19:55:09 UTC No. 16169514

>>16168720
How dare they admit their models are wrong!?

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 20:50:29 UTC No. 16169609

>>16168720
Look fukcing chud.
We have demonstrated that dark matter is a necessity and adding such fudge factors has been relevant, even Einstein did it. Our metacognitive framework is perfectly consistent and we will just add fudge factors to any predictions that aren't right, to save our models, our institutions, and our way of life. We do not care.
We already fabricated CMBR and black holes out of noise models and nobody cares. Science is an institution that must be upheld.

Anonymous at Fri, 10 May 2024 21:11:31 UTC No. 16169644

>>16169609
They literally admit the models are wrong. Are you retarded?

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 07:42:35 UTC No. 16170416

>>16169514
>>16169644
Nope, they maintain that the model is right and that we just need to "discover" new elusive types of matter/energy/radiation and they would affirm the model is right

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 11:11:21 UTC No. 16170601

>>16170416
Then that would be a new model... holy shit...

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 11:29:24 UTC No. 16170620

>>16169502
>things convieniently expand radially away from earth with no observed distortion between points on a secant anywhere else in the universe
Come on dude

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 11:39:04 UTC No. 16170625

>>16170620
So true, Christ is king!

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 11:57:39 UTC No. 16170638

>>16168436
>physics progress is just inventing new dark things every 30 years to explain why your models don't work

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 12:26:36 UTC No. 16170662

>>16170638
>New things are found and that's le bad
Brilliant take

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 12:44:29 UTC No. 16170680

>>16170601
No it's not. They still say physics are the same as they are currently understood. The expansion of the universe, gravity etc. all the same, they just keep adding variables that facilitate the house of cards they built

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 12:46:33 UTC No. 16170685

>>16170680
>... they just keep adding variables
Then it's not the same, stupid animal

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 12:51:06 UTC No. 16170692

>>16170685
Yes it is, faggot. Physicists can't swallow their pride and say "gravity works differently", "the universe not expanding is a reasonable claim", "the big bang might not hold up as a theory", they keep inventing new and new shadow speculations to keep their convictions alive. There's nothing new here.

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 12:59:10 UTC No. 16170699

>>16170692
>"the big bang might not hold up as a theory"
They've already done this. The current common model is eternal inflation, they've done away with the singularity.

>"gravity works differently"
They've already admitted that they have no idea how gravity works on a quantum level, which means they don't know the mechanism behind it.

>"the universe not expanding is a reasonable claim"
Because they have measurements that say the opposite.

You're just a christtranny with a bone to pick with science.

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 13:23:24 UTC No. 16170724

>>16168720
If you would just give these STUNNING and BRAVE scientists MORE GRANT MONEY I'm sure they will be happy to look into these mysteries of the universe for you. Sure it'll cost $20 million and take 5 years. Sure all the scientists are getting paid top dollar to look smart all day and have no real consequences if all their "theories" are false....but let's just throw money at them for 40+ years until they retire richly having accomplished no real science.
>>16168755
>NO REFUNDS

>t. astronomers

Anonymous at Sat, 11 May 2024 13:31:46 UTC No. 16170737

>>16170699
>The current common model is eternal inflation,
Eternal inflation from where?

>Because they have measurements that say the opposite.
Until they say the measurements were wrong and claim they always said it could be wrong by pointing to an obscure footnote of an obscure paper no one read from 15 years ago.

>You're just a christtranny with a bone to pick with science.
Maybe people are just tired of being gaslight by "scientists" who misrepresent scraps of data for scientific truths beyond debate. When you really look into the minuscule amount of data we have about deep space and the HUGE amounts of computers and algorithms that touch the data before it's even in human readable format...well it's laughable to claim you know anything. You get some numerical output from a server rack and you spend months poking and prodding the numbers to extrapolate what you want to see. Then you trick people into believing it with 90-99% made up pictures or conjecture. When in reality all you have is a data table or a few numbers in a stream. Every exoplanet atmospheric classification is based off a simple spectrogram. The margin for error is massive to say the least and the amount of information based on "educated guesses' is the vast majority.