> Those are not tuning parameters at all. Then explain how MOND is able to make predictions that don't need such considerations. This suggests either that dark

> Those are not tuning parameters at all. Then explain how MOND is able to make predictions that don't need such considerations. This suggests either that dark matter is superfluous, or that dark matter has some underlying order that reproduces MOND in some limit, thus eliminating the tuning needed. This is the approach taken by some superfluid dark matter models, which at least is not ignoring the problem. > Regarding the linked article, it an article written by proponents of MOND and is not objective Right, because anti-MOND or dark matter reviews are totally objective? > Just the fact that MOND still requires dark matter anyway to reproduce CMB is major problem for it It's not at all a problem to say we need DM like sterile neutrinos, since DM alone is insufficient to adequately explain all observations anyway.