3 ms·
Destroying modern cosmology is constructive! They can't lose their cosmology, because hundreds of years will come due if that happens. Because theirs spins who
by NHQ 4y ago
Destroying modern cosmology is constructive! They can't lose their cosmology, because hundreds of years will come due if that happens. Because theirs spins whole fake world, but it really provides no meaning, only fantasies (aliens, black holes, worm holes, weird mathematical phenomena played out in the model).
The modern scientific and academic system is hundreds of thousands of people who are not there to challenge knowledge, but play with models for tax dollars. I'd rather destroy their models and send them home than prove my own, for they would only appropriate mine into their models, and continue their deception with more power for knowing the truth.
I could tell you the truth, and we could work to validate it, but you won't believe me without what, science based on measuring the sky? Yet you buy their science which I can invalidate, and you can't validate beyond pointing to "what scientists believe". So that tells me, there's no point in making a better model right now. One good shot will kill their cosmology, and then the bottom will be out and we can put the cosmos back, together.
You can wait and see tho, stay believing we will go to Mars, you will die with that dream unrealized. Were you born yesterday you will die before humans go to mars. Unless you think Mars is WAR, like people did before rulers changed the meaning of things. In that case, we are definitely going to Mars.
Galileo was the point when the narrative changes from "we matter to god as the center of the universe", to this heat death nihilism. Why, because telescopes? I don't buy it. They could have smote Galileo and kept the old doctrine intact. I suspect something bigger...
- simion314 4y agoSo you have shit, you read a blog about some mathematical paradoxes about infinity and now think you somehow are smarter then everyone else. Models are evaluated by how well they predict the reality but models are not the reality. So you can complain that Newton model for mechanics is imperfect but as long as it does the job for me and you bring nothing better I will still use it productively. I am trained in math not cosmology so I wanted to get a link to read about your better model.
- NHQ 4y agoModels don't predict anything about space or the universe. We can't do anything out in the universe, only down here in earth atmospheres. You'd rightly assume somebody daft if they suggested using economic models on the universe, but not quantum physical models. I'm not pushing my models or cosmology, I'm destroying the lie of academic cosmology based on weak rational sciences. I cannot convince you of another cosmology if you can't disbelieve what you've been told. You believe science has actually been done on the cosmos, because measurements. You believe big bang, black holes, entropy and heat death, and infinite space, rather than reckoning those are things that disprove. You believe thermodynamics is universal and eternal, despite the fact that life itself breaks with them, and is older than most of your "stars" in "space". You deny your own existence to believe in scifi universality. No internet link is going to convince you otherwise.
- simion314 4y agoMy guess is that you think God created everything around 5000 years ago in 6 days right?