On Jun 17, 12:52*pm, "Painius"
wrote:question_!

If someone comes along with a "push" theory of any
kind, particulate or energetic, science will not even try
to begin to accept it unless the proposal is neatly and
tightly wrapped with hypercompelling evidence found
by strictly applying the scientific method.

Eggzackly. That's precisely why the VS'ers need to look at super and-
hypernovae, quasars etc., and show the hypercompelling evidence
explaining the _mechanism_ by which their geometry, 'metrics', '4-D
fields', "curvature of space-time", 'exchange particles'/"gravitons"
literally POWER these phenomena.
By contrast, the "push" force of the
hyperpressurized spatial medium very deftly and unequivocally
_demonstrates itself_ in the behavior of gravity, most notably in the
aforementioned phenomena. How much more 'scientific' does the evidence
need to be?

...and we
continue to bang our (fortunately very hard) heads up
against walls of steel.

And yet, the banging can be fun, educational, even
occasionally insightful. *Or so i keep reminding myself.

Hyup! The Fun part is what it's all about, as i've said so many times.
Whenever it ceases being Fun is when i quit doing it (as has happened
a time or two when the NG got excessively overrun by freaks and
mutts).