Really? Which scientific findings have I not accepted? Which questions have I circumvented?
You gave an example of a 'double supernova', a topic that is being actively discussed in the astronomical community, but in no way supports your claims.
I have pointed out that the Plasma-Universe or the Electric Universe models are failures. And I also pointed out that gravity clearly exists and is NOT electromagnetic. You are the one denying current science from what i can see.
And you "explained" away the double/multiple supernova glimses as a result of "gravitatitonal lensing", which is a cosmological nonsense and just an "explanation" which is fitted to conserve a false cosmological perception.
Scientists STILL talks of double supernovaes wich explodes several times so dont deny this or explain it away.
NASA - NASA's Swift Sees Double Supernova in Galaxy
The other thing was your false and highly biased definition of "intuition" - just in order to deminish the fact that our ancestors had this genuine skill. It is NOT thrustworty for any debaters to be that wrong in a debate. And certainly not for a Moderator, correct?
I´m not denying current science just the idiotic part of it, like the gravitational assumptions. I really would like to be a fly over your shoulders when you studied Plasma-Universe and the Electric Universe. I bet you just follow the conventional scientists without even have spend many minutes thinking for yourself over the possibilities.
OK I´m refusing 1/4 part of the fundamental forces and the weakest of them all - and you refuses the rest 3/4 of the fundamental and formative force which are much stronger and ALL Electromagnetic in their nature.
I think this just says it all.