As in, a tiny minority of scientists who counter 97% of scientists got all the publicity. This new news won't get 5% as much coverage as the articles doubting Einstein.
Some scientists were wrong (who thought they were wrong in the first place but didn't know why) and dis-proven quickly is the same as legitimate scientists still saying global warming is real and thus it must be wrong? e: that sounds confusing. The scientists that released their faster than light neutrino data right from the start said "we think there is something wrong with this, but we are measuring ">c" values. please help us prove we're wrong. that should not be compared to global warming; where scientists never said "we think we're wrong" nor have they changed their mind other than "oh we thought this could account for the change, but it turns it there is more of a problem than first thought" p.s. the sun cycle should be cooling right now.
Not embarrassing at all. The scientists got an anomalous result. The published and asked others to verify. The verification showed an error. That is how real science done by real people actually works. Compare to science deniers who state a conclusion and ignore evidence. Or who copy/paste from a web site and say "aha! I just disproved ______________ " without even knowing what ___________ is. (fill in the blank - Nazi holocaust, global warming, HIV causing AIDS, evolution, sexual variation in nature, the towers fell when planes hit them, etc.)
