Who am I to be taken seriously? The condescension is a part of the attitude of those who consider something "settled". You made the claim that we have observed matter falling into a "black hole". The evidence that you didn't present says we have some observations, but only supposition as to what it means.
In your eyes, that evidence may be "beyond a reasonable doubt", but from my perspective, that evidence barely scratches the surface of what we need.
Science is not about dogma, it is about investigating the universe about in a systematic way and looking at all sorts of models and theories that can provide a handle on understanding.
But none of those models or theories will ever be the "truth". They can be adequate for the purposes needed, but outside of those limited areas, other models will be required. These other models will give a better description and handle within their limits. For all the desire for a "theory of everything", it will not be achieved. There will always be anomalous observations.
Whether you agree or disagree, that is simply your choice and anything I say will be seen through your filters and biases. That is what happens to all of us.
You can believe that GR is the "bee's knees", I can believe differently. You can believe in little blue fairies living at the bottom of your garden, if you like. I put little blue fairies in the same basket as "black holes".
We have lots of very interesting observations of lots of very interesting things out there. I just have problems with the inconsistencies of the models used to describe these things.
In your eyes, that evidence may be "beyond a reasonable doubt", but from my perspective, that evidence barely scratches the surface of what we need.
Science is not about dogma, it is about investigating the universe about in a systematic way and looking at all sorts of models and theories that can provide a handle on understanding.
But none of those models or theories will ever be the "truth". They can be adequate for the purposes needed, but outside of those limited areas, other models will be required. These other models will give a better description and handle within their limits. For all the desire for a "theory of everything", it will not be achieved. There will always be anomalous observations.
Whether you agree or disagree, that is simply your choice and anything I say will be seen through your filters and biases. That is what happens to all of us.
You can believe that GR is the "bee's knees", I can believe differently. You can believe in little blue fairies living at the bottom of your garden, if you like. I put little blue fairies in the same basket as "black holes".
We have lots of very interesting observations of lots of very interesting things out there. I just have problems with the inconsistencies of the models used to describe these things.