Toddsterpatriot,
I was out for a while, but I didn't forget you made me some questions.
Their thinking is based on debunked theories.
Well, if you never think, how can you ever debunk a theory?
The theory of the Sun orbiting around earth has been debunked.
Then why they "observe" those moons "looking for life" in them?
You think they're looking at those moons hoping to see a tree or a whale?
No.
That is the point, they claim the saw them.
Post their claim, so we can discuss.
Its in the article, claiming they detected molecules which on earth are found in living things. Read it for yourself.
A star produces light because the collision of its particles causes it.
Collisions "cause" light? Particles in our atmosphere collide, does that cause light?
Not all car collisions cause deaths... duuuhhhh
The idea of a collapsed star which lost the collision of particles and ended with the particles compressed to themselves into the center of the body,
Stars don't "lose the collision of particles", but they can shrink if the outgoing energy isn't enough to counteract the gravity pulling the star toward its core.
You don't know much about that fantasy of black holes. Those imaginary bodies are assumed to have the particles frozen, without motion.
Their silly idea is that because such body is compressed to an extraordinary density, then that body is capable to pull with its formidable "gravity" deforming an imaginary space-time, everything around.
All of this never observed but solely invented with formulas in a piece of paper.
You don't think black holes have been observed?
Of course they don't exist. The whole thing is just fraud.
If the case that a collapsed star can happen that way, compressing its particles and "gluing them" until they lost their motion, then such star becomes just a dead body, like a corpse in the middle of space.
Like a white dwarf or a neutron star.
No, because dwarf stars have particles in motion.
This theory of black holes was invented in order to resurrect the dead theory of relativity.
Why is relativity a dead theory?
Physically time doesn't exist.
The same fraudulent man who validated relativity in 1919 doing make ups to the plates taken in the expeditions, this same man, Eddington, is also behind the theory of the black holes.
Eddington committed fraud? Show me.
Book "Einstein's Luck" (which name is a parody for the words of loony Hawking saying that relativity validation was "sheer luck")
In this book you will read step by step the whole whereabouts of the expeditions, the problems taking plaques from the eclipse, the results favoring the prediction of Newton, the actions of Eddington to diminish the plaques favoring Newton and even making make ups to the plates to validate at all cost the prediction of Einstein.
Further than this explanation, how other expeditions found both predictions (newton and Einstein) as invalid... but... but as the author is also a relativist, he says that even when the validation because the eclipse results was not justified at all, that other kind of experiments seem to validate the theory after all.
You will notice that this science historian, Waller, wrote the book to show the huge mistakes in science history.
Now well, besides that the eclipse plaques invalidated the theory of relativity, I can easily point you one by one any other claim made to validate that good for nothing theory.
So make your list, and I will show you that such a list in a piece of paper is not even worthy as toilet paper.
. There just isn't enough challenging atheist views here. When we can't discuss stuff at a higher level because one side cannot answer my questions, then I know I am talking with people with an agenda and are probably ignorant about science. They just go through the motions.
-
