In article , jacobnavia
writes:

Le 08/06/2015 09:09, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) a écrit :
Were there no other evidence for the concordance model

I posted here on April 13th in the "Dark energy doesn't exist?" thread a
result that implied otherwise:

quote
The authors conclude that some of the reported acceleration of the
universe can be explained by color differences between the two groups of
supernovae, leaving less acceleration than initially reported.
end quote

There is mounting evidence AGAINST dark energy.

Suppose things were reversed. Everything supports what you believe,
then ONE observation goes against it, at less than 3 sigma. Would you
believe it? Would you speak of "mounting evidence"? No. You would
probably say "one tentative result is not enough to convince me".

The situation now is that essentially all observations support the
concordance model, then one observation looks to be a bit less secure.
Yet you tout this as indicating "dark energy doesn't exist" or whatever.

The universe is what it is, regardless of what anyone believes it to be
or wants it to be. The only thing which is important is a proper
interpretation of observations. ALL observations.