posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 11:52 AM
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Unit541
Sure it can be argued away.
Black holes are not the only possible explanations for what we have observed in space, they are the only possible explanations according to general
There's some narrow mindedness going on in this thread. You've refuted your own argument, in the first sentence of
your argument... You say
they don't exist, then you go on immediately to say we've observed them.
I will again state my original point, that it's entirely possible that we have no idea what these things really are and how they actually work
(actually, the fact that we don't understand how they work is widely accepted), but this doesn't mean they don't exist
Would you be satisfied if we just called them something else? You can say you can all you want, you cannot argue away the existence of these objects
that we call "black holes". While they may not be what we think they are, nobody, not even you, can dispute the fact
that there is something
there. We have decided to call these "somethings" black holes, just because it sounds a lot cooler than just calling it a "thing". We know than
when the core of a massive star collapses in on itself under it's own mass, it ceases to be what we describe as a star. Does it still exist? Uhh...
yeah, it does. Although we can no longer "see" it in the visual spectrum accessible to humans, we do see visual evidence of it's presence in other
spectrums. We can also easily identify them as real, active objects by the gravitational lensing that occurs when they appear in our field of
So again, how can anyone say that these objects don't exist
? Maybe we're completely wrong about how they work, but that doesn't mean they
. For example, I am completely baffled by your stance that these objects don't exist. But, you're still here aren't you...