Alas, many skeptics, even on HN, prefer to make general armchair-physics arguments despite the information already out there, condensed and edited, and backed by peer review and hundreds of citations into the literature.
Annoyingly, sometimes these skeptics even then complain that there is not enough information to really be sure, as if they have looked.
The link lacks answers to the basic, first-order questions I've asked regarding methods, particularly methods that yield historical background to currently observed phenomena. Also, your attitude of contempt, and continued reliance and argument from authority, shows weakness. After all, if you really knew what you were talking about, the answers to my questions should be easy.
Alas, many skeptics, even on HN, prefer to make general armchair-physics arguments despite the information already out there, condensed and edited, and backed by peer review and hundreds of citations into the literature.
Annoyingly, sometimes these skeptics even then complain that there is not enough information to really be sure, as if they have looked.