Science is predicated on questioning what is seen - whether in the literature or through the telescope or whatever. It's a primary focus. Maybe what you meant is that you can't accept what you read without questioning the source, looking for confirmation, applying prior knowledge, etc. I would absolutely agree with that.
If there's one thing I've learned in my life so far it's that 'You can't convince someone who doesn't want to be convinced lest they suddenly realise they've been conned'. So you carry on soaking up this ridiculous nonsense about 'colliding galaxies' and 'the universe is getting bigger/smaller' and 'black holes bumping into each other' 'stars being born/dying' like a willing sponge while I carry on exposing it for being ridiculous nonsense.
Im ready to be convinced by you. Just post your science. I will compare your science to others. I promise.
No, real scientists operate by creating a thesis, then trying to disprove it. What you are talking about is the opposite of what a scientist is.
Well of course I understand the theories and the selfless imperatives of experimentation, and that it's exactly those disciplines which lead to the 'tangible benefits for mankind' which I mentioned: but how many so-called cosmologists can you think of whose dedicated and altruistic work has been in pursuit of innovative research to improve the lot of mankind, as opposed to 'working' for the sole purpose of publishing nonsensical space drivel about 'colliding galaxies, black holes about to bump into each other, blah blah effing blah', and are driven on in order to protect their non-productive jobs-for-life in the fake-science industry called 'astronomy'? Incidentally, here's the latest result in the charlatans' relentless and dedicated research for the benefit of the human race: "Astronomers have detected when the universe’s stars switched on" Note the words 'switched on', then tell me how a star can be switched on?? Can you not perceive the condescension of using semantics as if to a 5-year old? Wake up and smell it, fgs - they're taking the mickey out of you. https://uk.news.yahoo.com/astronomers-detected-universe-stars-switched-093425014.html
Okay, let's just use the example that they keep saying the universe is 'shrinking/expanding' (depending upon which day of the week it is? ) Now then, pre-supposing you agree that 'space' (viz. the absence of animal, vegetable, or mineral?) can be measured only by barometric pressure or atmospheric density, what possible means is there to measure a milk-bottle full of it, never mind the entire universe? Now don't be silly, and stop making daft impossible-to-meet demands!! And tell NASA to cut the crap too.
"Of all the sciences cultivated by mankind, Astronomy is acknowledged to be, and undoubtedly is, the most sublime, the most interesting, and the most useful. For, by knowledge derived from this science, not only the bulk of the Earth is discovered . . . ; but our very faculties are enlarged with the grandeur of the ideas it conveys, our minds exalted above [their] low contracted prejudices." JAMES FERGUSON, 1757† Long before anyone knew that the universe had a beginning, before we knew that the nearest large galaxy lies two million light-years from Earth, before we knew how stars work or whether atoms exist, James Ferguson’s enthusiastic introduction to his favorite science rang true. Yet his words, apart from their eighteenth-century flourish, could have been written yesterday. But who gets to think that way? Who gets to celebrate this cosmic view of life? Not the migrant farmworker. Not the sweatshop worker. Certainly not the homeless person rummaging through the trash for food. You need the luxury of time not spent on mere survival. You need to live in a nation whose government values the search to understand humanity’s place in the universe. You need a society in which intellectual pursuit can take you to the frontiers of discovery, and in which news of your discoveries can be routinely disseminated." -Neil deGrasse Tyson
youve enlightened me, milk bottles and barometric pressure measurements of space seem a much better way to determine if space is expanding rather than red shift 1 a science.You should post this paper to the scientific community
ohh after milk bottles and barometric pressure in space, it doesnt work. what does your measurement show? Space expanding, shrinking or neither? Please help us follow your science.
If you are so independent and don't follow the common herd why do you post the same sort of anti-intellectual anti-NASA drivel as every other flat earther? Rejecting facts that you don't understand doesn't make you of an "independent mind".
Look mate, every profession has its confidence tricksters, charlatans, self-serving empire builders, and 'jobs-for-life without having to work (emphasis on 'without having to work'?) incompetents, so here's what we'll do - you carry on believing spurious and non-provable 'facts', and I'll carry on rejecting them as the nonsense that they are. A metaphor might be the story of 'The Emperor's New Clothes' - you et al are the crowd telling him how nice he look in them, and I'm the boy who can see he's not wearing any clothes.
So, Cerberus seems to be a Doppler Effect denier. That puts him on par with Flat Earthers. I don't know if he is an actual Flat Earther, but he acts the same way. Flat Earthers also declare that they're the only ones smart enough to recognize the great secret global conspiracy. And Flat Earthers also get all bug-eyed, red-faced and spittle-flecked when people refute their conspiracy theories with facts and evidence. It's a combination of toxic narcissism, Dunning-Kruger Syndrome and histrionic personality disorder.
When you have anything to say to or about me, then use one of my posts as the quotation so I'll know you've responded. Or maybe you 'forgot' the protocol, knowing I won't see your critique? Now that I have stumbled upon it I'd respond as I always do to, but in the case of your juvenile rant, consisting of nothing more substantial than a few of NASA's buzzwords, there's nothing to respond to.
"Proof if proof were needed that bullshit baffles brains?" is a "mantra know to all"? I make as many typos as the next guy but flat earthers seemed to be uniquely challenged in their ability to string together a sentence.
I suspect that diatribe speaks more about your irritation at my opposing views on the topic than my grammatical shortcomings?