3 ms·
I admit I didn't click this link at first given the seeming vapidness of the claim, and I will correct myself here that the passage cited is from the cited woul
by Dalewyn 3y ago
I admit I didn't click this link at first given the seeming vapidness of the claim, and I will correct myself here that the passage cited is from the cited would-be paper rather than the linked article.
I say "would-be" because that's what the article has to say about the would-be paper:
>In the new theoretical paper, uploaded to the pre-print database arXiv in December 2023 but not yet peer-reviewed, Sierra Solter-Hunt, a doctoral candidate at the University of Iceland, proposed that this atmospheric spacecraft dust may compromise the magnetosphere — the part of Earth's magnetic field that extends into space and protects the atmosphere from solar radiation.
So it's not a paper yet and namely hasn't been reviewed by peers, nor is the author a doctor (as in PhD) proper yet. This isn't something layman can refer to for information, not yet anyway.
Given that, I stand by my initial claim that this is fearmongering and FUD. Nothing in there has been confirmed as worthy of our time to discuss.
- squigz 3y agoSo they point out it's a theoretical paper that hasn't been peer-reviewed yet, but it's FUD? Interesting I assume you apply this standard to every arXiv paper posted here or referenced by a science publication?
- Dalewyn 3y agoIf someone asks me to fear/panic/rage over something that is at best speculation as of publication? Yes I will call that FUD and be on my way. Doesn't matter if it's from Arxiv or 4chan.