Originally posted by ngchunter
EU isn't the only alternative explanation, and it's easily the most disproven.
By all means do it, lets hear it, it's time the gloves come off on this issue.
Perhaps you'd like to talk about the Sun again?
I always hear baseless generalizations such as that, but no one can come up with the goods.
For a model that is so easily debunked it's already made many many correct predictions, more than 100 years of big bang cosmology could produce.
Shall we compare predictions? the proof of a valid theory?
And debunking Big Bang cosmology is like shooting fish in a barrel.
MOND is a perfect explanation for galaxy motions without introducing a single speck of dark matter, and if it were expanded to include
relativistic effects it might explain all other observations that would otherwise have to introduce exotic matter and energy.
All other theories are also based on a gravity central cosmology. There is substantial proof that galaxies are formed from electromagnetic energy that
overpowers gravity a thousand billion, billion, billion, billion times rendering gravity to be pretty much insignificant.
Which means all gravity based theories will fail.
Your comment regarding MOND I assume stems from this article.
And I'm glad you mentioned because it also refutes the standard model, It looks as though some are starting to come to their senses.
Study plunges standard theory of cosmology into crisis
Well it's been in crisis mode for a long time now. I think this news is a breath of fresh air.
And this is not a cosmological model, (yet) it's an observation that happens to refute the standard model. So what other models are you talking
about besides Steady State?
From the article-
Competing theories of gravitation have already been developed which are independent of this construction. Their only problem is that they conflict
with Newton's theory of gravitation......
“Maybe Newton was indeed wrong,” declares Professor Dr. Pavel Kroupa of Bonn University's Argelander-Institut für Astronomie (AIfA). “Although
his theory does, in fact, describe the everyday effects of gravity on Earth, things we can see and measure, it is conceivable that we have completely
failed to comprehend the actual physics underlying the force of gravity.”
There you have it, if we don't understand gravity, as this and many other observations have shown, how can we formulate a working theory of cosmology
based solely on gravity!! it will be flawed of course because the basic understanding at the very foundation is flawed.
Wall Thornhill has provided an alteration to MOND that includes electromagnetism and charge.
Pretending that EU is the only alternative people can turn to is a scam.
Never said anything of the sort. Man, what is it with the science apologists and their strawmen? Again I ask, what other models? and which do you
prefer? Oh, and be prepared to defend it.
I suggest you start a thread to debunk plasma cosmology and show why your preferred model is valid. Come on let's rumble.
[edit on 28-5-2009 by squiz]