Supermassive Black Holes - Another mainstream Waterloo

[Michael Mozina]

"How the Universe Works: Black Holes: The Secret Origin"

I forced myself to watch a new astronomy episode on TV last night on the topic of supermassive black holes in the supposedly "early" universe. It was quite revealing IMO, and downright comical.

What was comically laughable were the outrageous amounts of mental gymnastics that were being used to supposedly "explain" how such large objects could have existed in the supposedly "early universe". The basic problem for LCDM theory is that there wasn't enough time to from the supposed "big bang" to the formation of such supermassive objects. They couldn't have formed in the "standard" way that black holes supposedly form, from stellar corpses. Instead they claimed that "dense gas' in the early expanding universe somehow collapsed in a perfectly "spherically sentimental" pattern, over and over again, and *then* they all had to immediately start swallowing each other too.

Not once did they show any 'doubt' about their size, even though circuit theory would minimize the need for massive objects to explain high energy emissions from space.

I personally don't have a problem with the idea of massively heavy objects in space, but IMO it's just goofy that they assume that all high energy emissions near such objects is directly related to their mass. It's more likely to be directly related to the amount of current flowing through the object.

Of course they ignored every lab result over the past decade, and kept promoting 'WIMPS' as "dark matter". They yammered on about 'dark matter stars' and all sorts of absolute nonsense in a lame effort to overcome all their creation mythology problems that are associated with LCDM theory. What a joke.

I simply cannot even watch mainstream movies anymore without laughing at them. They have *nothing* even approaching actual "knowledge" to offer anyone, yet they constantly claim to 'know' things about the universe and "dark matter". OMG! What a mess of a show that was.

[Michael Mozina]

Make that "perfectly symmetrical" collapse of material.

[Metryq]

My favorite thing is the Photoshopped images showing "gravitational lensing."

[Zyxzevn]

I don't think those images are photoshopped. Except for removing "noise" and adding colours.

Rings.

The rings are very likely to be plasma currents. Curved mostly by electromagnetic interactions, some by gravity.
Some are remains from explosions. The latter also explains why many of them can occur together in one spot.
Something that is not explained with gravity at all.

Multiples.

The multiple lights are simply similar structured plasma. All these multiple-light "lenses" show
a clear relation with the surrounding matter. So these are formed form that matter.

This all does not even include the diffraction (and reflection) of light caused by gasses and dark-mode plasma.

Whether you believe in gravitational lensing or not, there are simple explanations that
have not even been considered by the mainstream. Therefore I see all "evidence" for gravitational lensing
as fake science.

[Michael Mozina]

I guess the part that I find most annoying is the fact that *so many* different observations actually falsify their LCDM claims, yet they go into pure denial of all those failed tests. In this particular case, supermassive black holes would have to form in some kind of "magically uniform condensation" process, while undergoing "space expansion" and "space acceleration" in some kind of 'bang" process, without any rotation process involved. It's the ultimate mass contraction magic trick to overcome an obvious flaw in their model.

They've also found distant galaxies that defied their "reionization" predictions, yet they ignore those problems too. The topics change, but he denial process is exactly the same.

Ever since I was a kid the mainstream has been making excuses for all their 'test failures', while continuing to promote these ideas as being 'testable'. What's the point of doing "tests" when all the "tests" show they are wrong, and they simply ignore the results?

Their supermassive black hole problem requires supermassive faith in mass contraction magic. It's just another in a long line of historical *failures* of their model where they simply insert some type of dark magic.

The irony of course is that had they simply been willing to 'add electricity' to quasar theory they could decrease their reliance upon mass alone to explain high energy objects in space, and *that* would be a whole lot more "believable" than inserting a magical contraction process, followed by a mass swallowing feeding frenzy.

The lengths that the mainstream goes to just to *avoid the mention of electricity* is simply absurd. They suffer from a severe case of electrophobia.

[Metryq]

I don't think those images are photoshopped.

I have seen many images that were obviously "artist's renditions" accompanying articles. If astronomers have real photos to show—even noisy ones—why the artwork? That weakens the case as much as the electrophobia Michael spoke of. If the establishment acknowledged electrical currents in space, even if with a lesser influence than that modeled by EU proponents, then EU would face a steeper uphill climb. As it is, it's like shooting fish in a barrel when the establishment bends over backwards to deny currents in space. Charge is the most fundamental aspect of all matter, yet establishment astrophysics is blind to it.

[Michael Mozina]

It occurs to me that this issue is another great example of the complete lack of falsification potential with LCMD theory in general. Not only shouldn't these massive objects exist at such an early "age", the lengths that the mainstream will go to in order to ignore the problem is utterly absurd. Magic matter condensations is the key to their creative denial process.

The mainstream systematically ignores every single lab failure, every possible observation, every piece of information that falsifies their claims. Instead of embracing empirical physics, they just bury their collective heads in the "dark" sand, and continue to promote a supernatural creation mythology on a stick rather than to embrace electricity. Wow.

[Metryq]

The mainstream systematically ignores every single lab failure

They don't ignore the failures. They use them as an argument for even more funding to build more city-sized, underground detectors at a cost that would make military budgeting pale in comparison. Each new stupefyingly expensive engine will prove—once and for all—that the Big Bang is correct, and Einstein was right. A somewhat smaller budget is set aside to discredit and blacklist anyone who challenges conventional wisdom, and for the production of propaganda documentaries and books on acceptable cosmology.

[Zyxzevn]

The foundation of the Supermassive Black Holes theory is more based upon fantasy than
real world observations.

Another big problem for the big bang, is that there far away galaxies are still looking like normal galaxies,
just blurrier.

This light travels a long time through space to reach our telescopes, so these are very old.
Only half that age can be contributed to the theoretical expansion/inflation.
That means that a long time ago, at the beginning of the theoretical big bang, there were no
massive black holes or other fantasy structures.

So a long time ago, there were the same things things that we see now.

As if the big bang never happened.