Cosmic Catastrophe

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I looked at Ben Davidson years ago and regretted p---ing away my valuable time.
I know he's popular, but I consider him a crank.
He doesn't score a mention with reputable physicists, as they wouldn't waste the time either.
I recommend that he be followed up on for all predictions, then, when a failure arises, that he go away. Forcibly if necessary.
I have dozens of sources of REAL scientists that follow this stuff for a living.
Facts probably aren't as sexy as SO, but I'll take a bland diet of fact over a overstimulated imagination and zero peer review.
There couldn't be a worse time for sowing false catastrophes when we have the biggest real one staring at us down the barrel of a smokestack or tailpipe.

He relentlesslyattacks their dark matter honey pot. Of course he is unpopular.

[Piotrsko]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

He relentlesslyattacks they're dark matter honey pot. Of course he is unpopular.

Hunh.???? Idonunnerstandat.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Hunh.???? Idonunnerstandat.

The suspicious observer guy's position is that there is no such thing as magic particulate dark matter, hence the reason every single dark matter study has come up empty handed for 30+ years. He says the missing mass is literally regular matter that is dark and some of that mass isn't mass at all and that a portion of the "mass" we think we are seeing is regular old magnetic fields.
You aren't going to get hundreds of millions of dollars to study space dust that can't be seen and magnetic fields too weak to detect. In the mean time scores of PHDs, hundreds of doctorates have been earned writing about how magic dark matter particles have to exist so the universe works, so it's a self perpetuating lie, just like global warming.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by redneck

>

.

I think it's easier to buy a scientist. Less competition.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by Piotrsko

Hunh.???? Idonunnerstandat.

Their [not] they're.

Scientists got out ahead of their data, now improved sensing and observation are steering them back onto the path. Ben Davidson just sorta reports on other's work.

He's no Yanet Garcia.

[Piotrsko]

She's no Elizabeth Wainfan either.

Btw thanks for the clarification.

[redpoint5]

Everything is impossible because there's always 1 more "why" that can be asked.

[freebeard]

Quantum Physics sez "Thou shalt not pass!"

[Piotrsko]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Quantum Physics sez "Thou shalt not pass!"

Only if you're watching.

Or not.

I get confused anymore

[aerohead]

In # 97 (permalink ) freebeard shared that, it is from the Bible that the mention of our Sun going dark was mentioned.
I have three different Bibles, have read all three, and off the top of my head, have no recollection of reading such a thing.
A total solar eclipse would explain a short-term event.
Anything longer would require a larger body, beyond the orbit of the Moon, transiting the Sun, and by doing so, occulting the Sun, however, it would require a very slow relative motion, as witnessed from Earth, to explain a longer duration of darkness. 100-days seems like unicorn horns.
Atmospheric scintillation causes stars to 'wink' all the time when thermal convective currents are present in the night sky. Absorbed heat in a telescope tube itself can create challenges for 'seeing', until the telescope achieves equilibrium temperature.
The odds that any star, other than a cepheid variable could vary in luminosity for 100-days is problematic.
Once daylight comes, any star observation comes to an end. If a variable like Mira was dimmed, you would see it at all, even under magnification, until it's cycle brought it back around.
How one would be able to account for any specific star without charts, and not mistaking one for another would be an enormous challenge in ancient times.