Do you really want to say

that hubble tension is a result of a Nobel winning hoax from the 90s and no single basedencist noticed there's a problem with the data for nearly 30 years?

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Unattended Children Pitbull Club Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wait so Supernovae dom’t exist?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They do, but supposedly there's a problem with the data in the study (studies) about them. What I don't really understand is why no subsequential studies revealed the problem, they only made hubble tension worse. How is the science done? Have been sciencist repacking old data into new studies without any verification? Mind blowing.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why wasn't this brought up here before this pop-soientista got it out? Guess this proves that the only atronomygays here are conformal.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Apparently she learned it from someone else who talks about the issue.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Subir Sarkar

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Subir Sarkar
            lol wtf is this. do physicists really?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Pajeet Black only capable of analysing research instead of actually doing it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The basedentist plagirizer fears the pajeet reviewer
            Emperor is naked

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Pajeet Black only capable of analysing research instead of actually doing it.

            Based. We need people who know they aren't creative geniuses, but who are still smart enough to actually do the work, to just knuckle down and replicate/analyze/review/summarize things, because that's actually useful and valuable work that enhances the quality of science and academia. The last thing we need is more "creative idiots" writing junk papers that claim to advance something but which are just spinning wheels and mashing together combinations of things.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not how it works. What must be done is people should be doing relevant work so there is actual motivation for replication. But that won't happen, because it is fraudulent paper mill activity fleecing government grants from taxpayers. This is the same fraud as found with any bureaucratic enterprise.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            IQfy is too blackpilled about academia to do this work
            They would have thought it useless waste of time

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Why wasn't this brought up here before this pop-soientista got it out? Guess this proves that the only atronomygays here are conformal.

          There is tons of verification. Blind anayses, independent studies (by dozens of teams), mock data challenges. Sarkar on the other hand has done none of this. He finds different results obtained via different methods and claims everyone else is doing it wrong, despite the fact he has no deep knowledge of the topic.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They do, but supposedly there's a problem with the data in the study (studies) about them. What I don't really understand is why no subsequential studies revealed the problem, they only made hubble tension worse. How is the science done? Have been sciencist repacking old data into new studies without any verification? Mind blowing.

      >no single basedencist noticed there's a problem with the data for nearly 30 years
      they knew but ignored it because without deliberately inventing a problem you can't sell the solution.

      And naturally Sabine accepts Sarkar's claims without a second thought. Because the guy the claims against the mainstream must be legit. There have been shown to be many flaws in his anayses which laid out the criticism. It's not the case that he pointed out errors and everyone accepts things, he uses totally different methods and gets different results.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >no single basedencist noticed there's a problem with the data for nearly 30 years
    they knew but ignored it because without deliberately inventing a problem you can't sell the solution.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There was a high school teacher who analyzed the data a while back using his own methodology and came up with 84 km/s/Mpc. Turns out when your methods are honest you get almost exactly 1/4c^2.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Uh, your units are kinda fricked up there.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If that bothers you I recommend you don't read any of Maxwell's original papers (who am I kidding, you're not going to anyway)

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      anon, would you just believe any old moron on the internet if they disagreed with established science? high school teachers are not particularly good authorities on cosmology, and 84 km/s/Mpc is WAY off.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >blindly appeals to authority
        You can believe whatever you want, kid. Thinking is hard, I get it.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          What you're doing is specifically appealing to a LACK of authority. Genuinely stupid.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          There was a high school teacher who analyzed the data a while back using his own methodology and came up with 84 km/s/Mpc. Turns out when your methods are honest you get almost exactly 1/4c^2.

          As opposed to bringing up an uncited anacote where you decide that analysis must be correct because you like the number. Numerology not science.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >scientists lied for fame and fortune
    Why would they do that though?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *