> Every statement in your diatribe would seem to be predicate... I would be happy if they found any experimental evidence for their predictions. If you have fo

> Every statement in your diatribe would seem to be predicate... I would be happy if they found any experimental evidence for their predictions. If you have followed the field basically the majority opinion was that supersymmetry at the LHC would be inevitably found, as long as the Higgs mass was in a certain range (naturalness argument). Turns out it (narrowly) was in that range but supersymmetry was not found anyways. Arguably a lot of particle phenomenology in the last 20+ years was bad science in that way, because no new phenomena had actually been observed/measured and needed model building. Of course there is nothing inherently bad with conjecture or theory, but given the fact that there are lots of unsolved problems in physics on which progress was made in that time, a lot of what they were doing seems like a huge waste of time. Philip Anderson made his case for refocussing physics a long time ago: See his case against against the SSC: https://www.the-scientist.com/opinion-old/the-case-against-the-ssc-63734 https://www.the-scientist.com/opinion-old/the-case-against-t... and "More is Different" https://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4047/393 https://science.sciencemag.org/content/177/4047/393.