How reliable is science? (The limitations of science)

by David Turell , Wednesday, April 11, 2012, 17:56 (4607 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

The body of the article you linked stated:
> 
> " A caution is that this method using supernovae is built on several assumptions, and therefore independent checks of the result are important in order to draw any robust conclusion. "
> 
> yet the title claims: 'Cosmic mirages' confirm accelerated cosmic expansion-I don't disagree with your assessment of science as a business. but please read carefully when you snatch out a quote. I believe you have the wrong context:-"The accelerated cosmic expansion is one of the central problems in modern cosmology", Oguri says, "In 2011, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to the discovery of the accelerated expansion of the universe using observations of distant supernovae. A caution is that this method using supernovae is built on several assumptions, and therefore independent checks of the result are important in order to draw any robust conclusion. Our new result using gravitational lensing not only provides additional strong evidence for the accelerated cosmic expansion, but also is useful for accurate measurements of the expansion speed, which is essential for investigating the nature of dark energy".-The article is about a confirmatory method for a method in bold which has the assumptions. The headline in what is lay reporting of the science has hype but isn't that awful.