The abstract of the paper about which the article reports is less dramatic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.04878 https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.04878 "By comparing th

The abstract of the paper about which the article reports is less dramatic: https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.04878 https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.04878 "By comparing the Bayesian evidence for the models, we find that ΛCDM does a better job globally, while the holographic models provide a (marginally) better fit to data without very low multipoles." So the non-holographic model seems to be better globally even according to the paper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambda-CDM_model If the further research proves that holographic models are better, it's good too, let the best wins. But at the moment it still looks to be too early to conclude too much.