Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Dark Matter
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Justatruthseeker" data-source="post: 65039224" data-attributes="member: 332164"><p>Or perhaps dark matter doesn't exist at all. That's something to consider as well, considering 25 years of non-detection.</p><p></p><p>Tell me, how many non-detections did it take to falsify ether theories? Why isn't dark matter held to that same standard of falsifiability?</p><p></p><p>You certainly can't claim lack of mass anymore.</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.space.com/5348-view-universe-suddenly-bright.html" target="_blank">New View: Universe Suddenly Twice as Bright | Space.com</a></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/galex20090819.html" target="_blank">NASA - Galaxies Demand a Stellar Recount</a></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/01/scientists-sextillion-stars/" target="_blank">Scientists Find 200 Sextillion More Stars in the Sky | Fox News</a></p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120924123046.htm" target="_blank">NASA's Chandra shows Milky Way is surrounded by halo of hot gas -- ScienceDaily</a></p><p></p><p>That explanation just doesn't fly anymore now that technology has advanced to allow us to detect all the plasma that exists in the universe, nor is it reasonable to assume any mass is missing whatsoever.</p><p></p><p>But tell me, in light of the new discoveries of all this extra mass, has dark matter theories been revised to take this into account? or are we ignoring all that mass as well to keep Fairie Dust theories alive and well?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Justatruthseeker, post: 65039224, member: 332164"] Or perhaps dark matter doesn't exist at all. That's something to consider as well, considering 25 years of non-detection. Tell me, how many non-detections did it take to falsify ether theories? Why isn't dark matter held to that same standard of falsifiability? You certainly can't claim lack of mass anymore. [url=http://www.space.com/5348-view-universe-suddenly-bright.html]New View: Universe Suddenly Twice as Bright | Space.com[/url] [url=http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/galex/galex20090819.html]NASA - Galaxies Demand a Stellar Recount[/url] [url=http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/01/scientists-sextillion-stars/]Scientists Find 200 Sextillion More Stars in the Sky | Fox News[/url] [url=http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120924123046.htm]NASA's Chandra shows Milky Way is surrounded by halo of hot gas -- ScienceDaily[/url] That explanation just doesn't fly anymore now that technology has advanced to allow us to detect all the plasma that exists in the universe, nor is it reasonable to assume any mass is missing whatsoever. But tell me, in light of the new discoveries of all this extra mass, has dark matter theories been revised to take this into account? or are we ignoring all that mass as well to keep Fairie Dust theories alive and well? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Dark Matter
Top
Bottom