It's just like FE'ers claiming that the RE / solar system model does not accurately predict the movements of planets and stars. If it didn't, it wouldn't be the universally accepted model would it? And don't strawman me here by quoting that as an ad populum fallacy. The correlation is the other way around. If the system didn't work, it would not be universally accepted. Period.
You're wrong. RE can only predict the movements cosmos by invoking hypothetical undiscovered stuff like "dark matter" to make the calculations match the observations.
The accepted model of our solar system explains all movements of all natural celestial bodies perfectly, including gravitation and the fact that the Earth is round. It can be used to accurately predict stellar events decades into the future without fail.
You're wrong. RE gravitation alone does not accurately predict the cosmos, which is why you guys need "dark matter," "dark energy," "expanding space," "graviscalars," "WIMPs" and numerous other made up undetected phenomenons to make the calculations match the observations.
As far as I'm concerned, this discussion is not concerned with "smaller" levels. Neither is FET in general and neither am I for that matter. My point was that RET has a working, proven and reliable model for the solar system based on fundamental laws of physics,
No. You're wrong. RE cannot even work out the location of the moon or sun without claiming "refraction did it." See the
current thread on selenehelions for a reference.