I'm personally in the EU camp. For example, black holes are actually extremely dense, high pressure plasma fields. Black holes don't exist. Plasma connects us to the entire universe. We see this with the dark matter simulations (plasma). Even mainstream is steadily pushing in this direction, but of course they refuse to call it EU. They use language to avoid saying EU while describing EU. For example, mainstream says the sun is a nuclear event creating EM radiation as a side effect. But we have experiment confirming the EM event comes first, triggering nuclear/radiation events. In other words, mainstream theory of how the sun works is experimentally proved wrong and confirmed backwards. This is simply ignored because it invalidates mainstream's position. Look at the impacts on Saturn years back (Shoemaker-Levy, iirc). The "unexpected" explosions were fully expected because of the voltage potential differences. Plasma discharge also explains the moon's surface. Mainstream's explanation is objectively complete bullshit. It's trivial to claim this. Whereas experimental science (science backed by experiment) fully recreates the moon's surface and aligns with plasma discharge, fully aligning with EU. So on and so on... High density plasma clouds also create various effects where mainstream use other explanations. For example, EU doesn't require dark energy. Whereas dark energy is basically "magic" which is fully unsubstantiated. It's a theory required by bad math to support a bad theory which is explained by nothing but more bad math and bad theory. Fully unsubstantiated. And is only required in theory because the base theory is complete bullshit. There's also experiments which confirm the big bang never happened. Mainstream simply ignores these. That's not how science works. When your theory requires ignoring valid research explicitly because that research invalidates your theory, that's no longer science. Distances are basically guesses and estimates based on red/green shifts of "an expanding universe" created by the big bang theory. The "evidence" of an expanding universe is entirely predicated upon the big bang theory. These same shifts are also created by EU and are not expressions of expansion, they are distortions and lensing. In other words, stellar distances would actually be much closer (relatively for stellar distances) than is commonly preached. And the distances are not growing. So on and so on...