The article:
https://www.newscientist.com/article...finally-found/
claims that:
"Half the universe's missing matter has just been finally found"
implying that a lot of dark matter is not non-baryonic
but baryonic (i.e. ordinary matter)
The article mentions:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.10378v1 with the title:
"Missing baryons in the cosmic web revealed by the Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect"
https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.05024 with the title:
A Search for Warm/Hot Gas Filaments Between Pairs of SDSS Luminous Red
Galaxies

A article in with a different opinion:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw...g-matter-foun=
d-but-doesnt-dent-dark-matter/#499df136faf7
"Missing Matter Found, But Doesn't Dent Dark Matter"
This article reads:
"The fact that about 5% of the Universe's energy is in normal matter,
27% is dark matter, and the other 68% is dark energy has been known
for nearly 20 years now, but it remains as puzzling as ever."
Most(?) of this comes from studying the CMB radiation.
The article also states:
"But light plays a major role, too. Stars shine etc so measuring the
light coming from all of them tells you how much mass there is."
The problem of course is that there is a lot of (?) baryonic matter
which does not shine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic...ave_background
We read:
"The angular scale of the first peak determines the curvature of the
universe (but not the topology of the universe). The next peakâ=80_ratio
of the odd peaks to the even peaksâ=80_determines the reduced baryon
density. The third peak can be used to get information about the
dark-matter density." I assume the non-baryonic density.

This raises a serious issue: How can these CMB peaks be trusted and be
used to make predictions when observations reveal that the ratio
baryonic versus=

non-baryonic matter has changed?

Nicolaas Vroom