>"Quite the opposite, and that statement is obviously uninformed. The science behind dark matter is very precise and exact." From what I have seen they can get

>"Quite the opposite, and that statement is obviously uninformed. The science behind dark matter is very precise and exact." From what I have seen they can get precise post-dictions but not precise pre-dictions because there are so many free parameters (basically you can put dark matter wherever you need it). >"I've given you the link to the complete articles and also highlighted the major points. Try to read and understand them fully, then search for more." The claimed predictions from the 1970s and 1980s are not mentioned on that page. Also, that "startswithabang" guy is more like a catholic inquisitor than a scientist. I wouldn't consider him a reliable source because this behavior indicates he lacks the required capacity for curiosity, he can only repeat what authority figures say: "The blogger (@StartsWithABang) contacted @scilogscom on January 24 by replying to a 15-day old tweet that announced our blog’s move to the new domain. He tweeted “Bummed that @scilogscom is in the business of promoting contrarian scientist viewpoints.”, and asks the SciLogs.com community manager (@notscientific) “[Why] are you allowing @scilogscom to promote contrarian voices that undermine public understanding of [science]?”, adding “You have taken on “Dark Matter Crisis” blog, whose mission is to undermine all of physical cosmology & promote MOND.” The two agreed to discuss the issue via email, with the blogger adding that he was “personally worried that you are promoting clicks & false controversy over quality science content”, and states that he is “very, VERY disappointed about this move that @scilogscom has made”. By now the SciLogs.com community manager has explained to us what happened after these tweets. He and the publishing director responsible for SciLogs.com unfortunately assumed that the blogger’s criticism was justified. They decided to close our blog without conferring with others or asking us for a statement. After we complained about the discontinuation, they performed an internal investigation, which involved reaching out to astrophysicists and other people, and have realized that discontinuing our blog was a big mistake. We attribute SciLogs.com’s poor judgement to two factors: neither the community manager nor the publishing director has an (astro)physical background, it was the first time that SciLogs.com had experienced an attack against one of its blogs." https://darkmattercrisis.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/the-dark-matter-crisis-continues-on-the-difficulties-of-communicating-controversial-science/ https://darkmattercrisis.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/the-dark-m... Anyway, I can tell you know even less about this topic than me so let's leave it at that.