>Show we were she actually advocates for building any accelerator and you'd have a case. In point 18 of this article: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/03/

>Show we were she actually advocates for building any accelerator and you'd have a case. In point 18 of this article: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/03/nonsense-arguments-for-building-bigger.html http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2019/03/nonsense-arguments-..., her first suggestion for an alternative avenue of research is > (a) Astrophysical and cosmological observations attributed to dark matter. These are discrepancies between theory and data which should be studied closer, until we have pinned down the theory. Some people have mistakenly claimed I am advocating more direct detection experiments for certain types of dark matter particles. This is not so. I am saying we need better observations of the already known discrepancies. Better sky coverage, better resolution, better stats. If we have a good idea what dark matter is, we can think of building a collider to test it, if that turns out to be useful