The need of counterpoints and different views are important especially in academic field. But some debates got us lost as well. I would not say bad against YT but more about lack of quality one. Hope that will come.
Take an example of MONO discussed below. One claimed it is right but wrong in other prediction.
“ So MOND does predict more galaxies at high redshift however it also predicts earlier reionization than LCDM which it turns out not to be true and the mass function of clusters is not what we see purely based on X-ray temperatures. So getting one thing right at the expense of many others doesn't make this particularly viable.”
But the major discussion shifted to dark energy and refracted … and totally ignored that wrong predictions by mono … it is just hard to follow the threads.
Take an example of MONO discussed below. One claimed it is right but wrong in other prediction.
“ So MOND does predict more galaxies at high redshift however it also predicts earlier reionization than LCDM which it turns out not to be true and the mass function of clusters is not what we see purely based on X-ray temperatures. So getting one thing right at the expense of many others doesn't make this particularly viable.”
But the major discussion shifted to dark energy and refracted … and totally ignored that wrong predictions by mono … it is just hard to follow the threads.
But more discussion may help.