Ilk. That's a really polite word.
TXnMA and I have both written to you that expansion is observable on an intergalactic scale, not on a scale as small as the solar system. What part do you not understand? Read this.
At Earth’s surface, the outward acceleration away from the planet’s center is but a fraction (0.1 with 29 zeros after the decimal point) of inward gravitational acceleration — but it’s present.
Do you realize how tiny a number 0.000000000000000000000000000001 is? And, as I explained to you before, on a local scale, chemical and gravitational bonds are much, much stronger than the expansion rate.
Then why didn't you complain when TXnMA used it in reference to me in post #276?
Are you an unmitigated hypocrite?
"TXnMA and I have both written to you that expansion is observable on an intergalactic scale, not on a scale as small as the solar system. What part do you not understand?"
Again, you don't know the difference between an interpretation and an assumption. What you think you 'observe' are interpretations of red-shift, not observations of expansion and certainly not measured expansion.
Since I clearly said in post # 274 when I wrote TO YOU, "Expansion is invisible where it can be measured yet assumed where it cannot" the question is what part do you not understand?