GR did accurately account for all bodies in the solar system, but when you take a scale larger than the solar system GR becomes inaccurate, hence the dark matter problem. It cannot explain the motions of the galaxies, but professionals still loosely state that it is an accurate depiction of the very large. Then why do so many people trust it so much when it breaks down just outside of our solar system? It should be appallingly obvious that it is insufficient due to the limitations on observations when the theory was developed.
Huh? The motion of the planets was explained by Kepler, using what Newton would discover was the Law of Universal Gravitation, and based entirely on the painstaking charts of the "motion of the bodies of the solar system" compiled by Tycho Brahe. What in the world does it have to do with GR?
You don't seem to have any idea how gravity is applied to the study of galaxies. You will continue to spout crank anti-science nonsense as long as you remain ignorant of the subject matter. You really need a freshman course in physics to even be qualified to begin to speak on physics.
But the stupidest thing you can post is your crank opinions against the state of science. So what's really going on? You're a Creationist or your just flunked out of school?
There might have been something meaningful that could have come of this post, if you had merely mentioned the current state of the science concerning gravity and dark energy (that's what I think you meant, not dark matter, which is said to exist almost exclusively by application of the Law of Universal Gravitation.) :bugeye:
But you just can't get that chip off your shoulder, can you? Oh, here's a question: do you have school age kids or grand kids? So what do you tell them - that everything they're teaching in school is OK (like: It isn't not It ain't) - BUT - all the science teachers are liars.
Bad Creationists. :spank: Bad flunkouts. :spank: Good students, scholars and professionals. :bravo: