[d110af5ccf]

@Robotbeat isn't the one missing the point here. The incredible accuracy of those predictions serves as a testament to just how well we do understand that particular phenomenon. Now compare to neuroscience, where we struggle to accurately make (by comparison) the most basic of predictions.

[Supermancho]

> Now compare to neuroscience, where we struggle to accurately make (by comparison) the most basic of predictions.

I'm not addressing the hand wavy nature of the article, which is self-evident. This is irrelevant to the point being discussed.

[d110af5ccf]

> This is irrelevant to the point being discussed.

You might want to reread the thread for context. You don't seem to be discussing the same point as the people you're replying to.