Blurry ideas of modern-day astronomy
This is a detailed answer to @FoxFox 's comment to the bellow meme:
Before I go into details let me clear the following things:
- Stacking theories on each other supported by merely mathematical equations is a religion and not science because it ignores reality.
- Science is the answer to the questions of the Universe because it deals with verifiable observations, experiments, and real objects.
Now the comments:
"No.actually. Big bang theory does not describe the creation of the universe. It doesn't even attempt to describe such a thing. The theory also does not posit that something was created from nothing."
You are not serious,... are you?
It certainly does not describe the breeding of gerbils or how to carve piano legs from hardwood...
The Big Bang Theory is the leading explanation about how the universe began.
(https://www.space.com/25126-big-bang-theory.html)
In short, the Big Bang hypothesis states that all of the current and past matter in the Universe came into existence at the same time, roughly 13.8 billion years ago. At this time, all matter was compacted into a very small ball with infinite density and intense heat called a Singularity. Suddenly, the Singularity began expanding, and the universe as we know it began.
(https://phys.org/news/2015-12-big-theory.html)
----------------------------
"The expansion of the universe (described by inflation theory) does not rely on dark energy, it relies on gravity."
...??!?
And how in your Universe gravity is capable to "inflate" or "expand" anything?
So the expansion of the universe has not been slowing due to gravity, as everyone thought, it has been accelerating. No one expected this, no one knew how to explain it. But something was causing it.
...
What Is Dark Energy?
More is unknown than is known. We know how much dark energy there is because we know how it affects the universe's expansion. Other than that, it is a complete mystery.
(https://science.nasa.gov/astrophysics/focus-areas/what-is-dark-energy)
(In plain English: we don't have a clue what we are talking about but we can see an effect and gave it a fancy name already... to look and sound clever.
----------------------------
"Dark matter is not a theory, rather it's a hypothesis, a possibility."
Are you just thinking out loud?
... because I cannot see a statement anywhere about dark matter being a theory...
(Also, ... theory, hypothesis, possibility ... none of them are facts merely fantasies until proven.)
----------------------------
"Spacetime is not a 'thing' so it's no surprise that you can't see it."
Thank you for the clarification... I didn't understand why it is invisible...
By the way, this is one of the two statements you made which I can agree with. Spacetime is certainly not a thing. It is a theory. (It is also interesting how gravity can bend something that is not a "thing" ... I guess it is similar to your ways of bending my words... ;-)
----------------------------
"We all know a lot about the effects of gravity despite not knowing everything about it. We don't know everything about cancer either but it seems perfectly real."
I don't know who those "we" are, but official science knows nothing about gravity.
We experience an attracting force which cannot be explained - only described - by theories and mathematical equations ... we have given a name to it ... and that's all.
Also, your cancer analogy is inaccurate. Cancer may seem "perfectly real" to you but it has dozens (if not hundreds) of different causes resulting in similar symptoms. And some of those causes are understood much more deeply than gravity. But this is not our present topic ...
----------------------------
"The things that scientists have proven about the nature of reality are completely rational - anything which is not falsifiable is not used to support scientific theory."
Except that none of the above topics are "proven" or rational things.
You don't seem to understand what a scientific theory is. It can be absolutely based on falsifiable ideas. That is the purpose of a theory. To be challenged and disproved if possible.
Science is not "believing" in scientific theories but recognizing that the scientific approach of observing, experimenting then creating, challenging and modifying (even destroying) theories are the way to understand reality.
----------------------------
"Furthermore, science is not an alternative to irrational religions and doesn't pretend to be."
Of course, it is and of course, it does.
Definition of "alternative" (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alternative):
a proposition or situation offering a choice between two or more things only one of which may be chosen
That is exactly what real science is, compared to irrational, belief-based religions. You cannot be both rational and irrational at the same time.
(Well... you can... but you shouldn't.)
----------------------------
"Otherwise: nice meme." - Thank you,... it is.
----------------------------
Addition:
"Go and study the science for yourself, that way you don't have to take anybody's word for it. I haven't made any 'arguments', I've just helped you to debunk a bullshit meme. Glad to help. :D"
1. Without studying science this meme couldn't exist.
2. It's true, you haven't made any arguments...
3. Perhaps it is clear for you now that you have not "debunked" anything either since debunking a question is not possible.
You can debunk only a statement ... what this meme didn't make.
The only statements in it are the yellow sentences and those are made by the priests of theories.