Eric Gisse wrote:
On Aug 25, 10:00 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
I'm not sure what can disprove Dark Energy. Everything seems to prove it
exists. So did it really need this discovery to prove it any more?

Why not just fart and walk away like the rest of the assclowns here?
The links are always nice, but the whining commentary gets pretty
****ing old. By the way, New Scientist is ****. Quote the arXiv
preprint or give the journal cite, or at least quote a site that can
do proper science reporting.

Every link is valid, I don't see you posting original articles. So until
you start posting your own links to stories, I invite you to kindly
stick your head up your ass.

The real question is how much evidence do *YOU* need to accept dark
matter / dark energy?


What I have trouble with is the jumping to conclusions that this is a
proof of only one such theory. There are other competing as well as
complementary theories that this could also be a proof of, but no
mention of them. For example, it's equally a valid proof of Dark Fluid,
not just Dark Energy.

Yousuf Khan