Kind of expected this. As soon as more peer review starts on any astronomy claim big enough to be published in the NYT usually the initial claim slowly gets dismantled.
There are unsupported hypotheses I tell my coworkers and linkbait articles published in mainstream news. There must be a balance to allow new ideas but don't burn the science reputation.
what I would like to know, is at what distance could webb find the earth's identical twin? and idetify multiple unequivical signs of life.
I dont think it's very far, and there may be no candidates in range, so whats the best fit we might find, or do we realy need a bigger telescope?
Kind of expected this. As soon as more peer review starts on any astronomy claim big enough to be published in the NYT usually the initial claim slowly gets dismantled.
Science working as intended. If claims are made, we can verify them and correctly prove or disprove them.
There are unsupported hypotheses I tell my coworkers and linkbait articles published in mainstream news. There must be a balance to allow new ideas but don't burn the science reputation.
I claim P != NP.
Previous thread,
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43714203 ("“Most promising signs yet” of alien life on a planet beyond our Solar System" — 355 comments)
what I would like to know, is at what distance could webb find the earth's identical twin? and idetify multiple unequivical signs of life. I dont think it's very far, and there may be no candidates in range, so whats the best fit we might find, or do we realy need a bigger telescope?