Electric Universe Theory has non-mainstream coherent and sensible explanations for these type of phenomena. Any HN users well versed in it's explanations? Been reading up on it lately and I'd like to discuss.
http://dealingwithcreationisminastronomy.blogspot.ch/p/chall...
(At a cursory glance it looks valid, despite the domain name.)
Anyway, after around 5 to 10 hours of investigative reading on EU, it seems quite worthy to think about/ follow up on.
At the minimum it's become quite apparent that the Astronomical Standard Model has plenty of spots which are expressed as truth, when there are real problems with observation. I'm not even claiming EU is going to better, but staunch supporters do highlight some interesting inconsistencies and seemingly misguided judgements of modern astronomers. That's not to say their own pet theories are bound to be better though.
If you look at this, don't look at it to become more certain in EU, look at it to potentially become less certain in the standard model. Flaws are points of confusion we can mine for novel insight.
What type of phenomena? "Unexpected stuff"?
That being said, here's one that you might benefit from thinking about. The modern explanation of redshift from astronomical bodies seems just plain wrong. Why? There are large currents of plasma which are observed to connect two objects whose measured redshift (according to mainstream astrophysics) would put them at different sections of the universe.
Since we use redshift to make assumptions about the nature of spacetime, the big bang and an accelerating, expanding universe; the latter invoking necessary dark matter and dark energy (a purely theoretical, abstract idea by scientists which might never be found experimentally) this point deserves more credence than other points which fall under EU.
"One can acquire certainty only by amputating inquiry"
Society of Mind, Marvin Minsky