Recent content by ianwhi16

I have to link to well known science to refute comments that make no physical sense, and link to no sources whatsoever? Weird way of doing things. Seems like you really are encouraging pseudoscience. If he says the Earth is flat, and I disagree, I am the one who has to link to sources proving it...

"What is plasma woo?" It is an explanation from the Velikovskians of 'electric universe' to dismiss the event horizon images. They like to invoke plasma nonsense. I am qualified in plasma physics. None of them are. As for 'gibberish', did you read his post? Lol. How else would you like me to...

Gibberish.

According to everyone with a clue it is a black hole. Want to explain the stellar orbital dynamics around such a thing if it is just plasma woo?

You have no science. End of story.

As I said previously - try at least to make sense.

No, we have seen no such thing.

Try at least to make sense. When clusters collide, the 'ordinary' matter gets hung-up in the middle due to it interacting with other 'ordinary' matter. It is visible at various wavelengths. With dark matter, we predict that it should not interact with that 'ordinary' matter, nor even with itself...

And almost certainly won't provide. I've seen his type of anti-science rhetoric before. If I had to guess? I'd say an 'electric universe' follower. A neo-Velikovskian cult with no science and no scientists. Plenty of anti-science rhetoric, but no science!

The problem with MOND is that it fails at large scales. As in the lensing observations of colliding galaxy clusters that I mentioned upthread. It really does a bad job with the CMB, as well. IMHO, it is on its death bed. An interesting hypothesis that has outlived its usefulness. Those lensing...

Deal with the evidence that says dark matter exists. Simple. Get on with it. The usual anti-science rhetoric doesn't cut it. What is causing the lensing observed in colliding galaxy clusters? Last time I checked, even the MONDists required 'some' dark matter to explain those observations. Got an...

Tweaked gravity does not cause gravitational lensing.

Of course it responds to gravity! And the lensing observations of colliding galaxy clusters show that DM is there.

Sorry? Want to qualify that statement? I was asking the OP to discuss the evidence in favour of DM and DE. I doubt he/ she knows what it is, but if you are going to dismiss something, you'd better deal with the evidence for it, eh?

So, deal with the evidence for DM and DE. Yes?