[tombone12]

Go read Hossenfelder's review instead, its a better teardown. The fourth paragraph is:

> “Losing the Nobel Prize” is well written and engaging and has a lot of figures and, ah, here I run out of nice things to say. But we all know you didn’t come for the nice things anyway, so let’s get to the beef.

[kn0where]

Link for the lazy: http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2018/04/book-review-losing-...

[mannykannot]

The linked article makes some very pertinent additional points (as well as offering a counter to Keating's claim that Hossenfelder was unfairly reviewing an uncorrected proof, though Hossenfelder herself makes a good case for that being a non-sequitur.) For example, there is the part about how they needed data from the Planck team, and tried to get it without saying what they were doing, which is how they ended up scraping data, that they apparently did not fully understand, off a presentation slide.

[Luc]

Brian Keating's reaction to the review: http://backreaction.blogspot.be/2018/04/guest-post-brian-kea...

If you ask me, he's just digging deeper, especially when taking into consideration Sabine Hossenfelder's remarks within his reply.