>>12765157Do you know what the correspondence principle is, retard? Newtonian gravity is GR in the limit of the weak gravitational fields. You have to be insane to completely discard GR as it predicts literally all of phenomena and the only time it fails is in some extreme circumstances like the Big Bang or Planck scales. And when we have a working theory of quantum gravity, it has to reduce to GR in the non-extreme limit.
Where the fuck did you get the idea that dark matter and energy are somehow incompatible with GR and "falsify" it? All you need to do to model them is to add extra mass and a non-zero cosmological constant respectively. All cosmological simulations use GR and predict formation of galaxy clusters exceptionally well.
Dark matter is just something we don't understand because the current theory of particle physics, the Standard Model, has no particle that is heavy enough and doesn't interact electromagnetically and strongly. That's it. The problem isn't with GR when it comes to DM, retard.
>>12765163>the model showed errorswhat fucking errors? Point me to a single inconsistency GR exhibits when modeling dark matter.
>literally made up mathematics which solely exist to fix the hole caused by new data instead of taking new data and revising the model.There is no "made up mathematics", retard. There is data. My friend in hs did his extended essay on dark matter gravitational lensing, there is literally nothing mystical or made up about that stuff. Just because we don't know what something is made up of phenomenologically doesn't somehow invalidate GR, you absolute mong. Neutrinos were poorly understood when they were first hypothesized in the 1910s due to missing energy-momentum in beta decays. They were only discovered experimentally in the 1950s, because it's hard as fuck to detect them. If retards like you lived during that time you would've cried "REEEE ENERGY CONSERVATION IS WRONG WE NEED TO REVISIT MODELS BECAUSE MUH MADE UP NEUTRINOS".
