Astronomy and Deep Geology are Bunk

 We know scientists are absolutely shit at prediction. Every time they extend a theory, it's fuckin' wrong. 

 Speaking of mohorovičić boreholes, let's read the kula superdeep borehole wikipedia page for about twenty seconds.

 "During the drilling process, the expected basaltic layers at 7 kilometres (4.3 mi) down were never found, nor were basaltic layers at any depth. There were instead more granites, deeper than predicted. The prediction of a transition at 7 kilometres was based on seismic waves indicating discontinuity, which could have been caused by a transition between rocks, or a metamorphic transition in the granite itself."
 "The drilling mud that flowed out of the hole was described as "boiling" with an unexpected level of hydrogen gas."

 As expected, scientists immediately get FAFO'd by experiment.

 If it didn't replicate, it didn't happen. 

 

 Largely this is because scientists aren't scientists. [If it didn't replicate]...this is literally science 101. If I have to tell you, you're not a scientist. They have the job description, but not the skills. Which is not surprising. Humanity is evil. Satan's children. Second, they are funded by black governments. They are politicians, not scientists, or they get fired. See also: public choice theory applies. Government science is an extremely efficient way of mass-producing lies. 

  

 I was reading about suns recently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_giant

 It's important to remember all this stuff astronomers confidently assert is mostly bullshit. It's based on models. If you dig one sun borehole they will turn out to be false, guaranteed.

 They will tell you about the inside of the sun. They have no idea.
 They also can't see shit. Telescopes are primitive. Stone age. The oort cloud is theoretical - they can't see it. To first order approximation, we have no clue what's out there. A bit like medicine. Assume the doctor is trying to kill you, unless you specific, local evidence to the contrary. Assume the astronomer is literally worse than an astrologer, unless you have specific, personal evidence to the contrary. 

 Astronomers can't experiment, so Reality can't beat them upside the head with her teaching stick. As a result, they would be smarter with the brains on the outside, drying in the sun, rather than the inside. Net error would go down.

  On the upside, that blue sun drawing is well done.

 

 Part of a pattern I should perhaps write about soon. The observation/analysis divide. Observing keenly is fairly common. Understanding what you've seen is almost impossible. Reading witness reports is fine, and when they get to conclusions you can stop reading 99.999% of the time. Similarly folk can tell you what a social system is doing, but not what it can do. They have no idea how it will respond to impulses.
 That is: astronomers can observe stellar lifecycles because galaxies are all different ages, thus, for any star, they can find a star that's the same but slightly older, and chart it that way. Anything they can't directly observe is based on analysis, which they are incapable of. Anyone capable of analysis does it in realms where they can be proven wrong, so as to show off when it isn't. Unfortunately, it is precisely astronomy et al that needs the highest analysis skill - it's not impossible, it's merely too difficult. Far more difficult than can be handled by the capacities of anyone willing to work for the government.

 Seen is real. Thought is not real. Perhaps call it NPC science.