First they “invented” dark matter. That didn’t exactly fit so they had to invent dark energy. Neither can be observed or measured. It’s all a house of cards that will tumble down soon.(No gravity pun intended)
They’re not dealing with economic intervention, “global warming” or actually creating anything, so the effects of their suppositions have ZERO effect on the rest of us.
They have to make certain educated “guesses” when dealing with this stuff, in order to move the conversation, experimentation and observation forward.
Like true scientists, these guys actuall admit it when they’re wrong and begin to work on new theories and observations.
The “climate change” guys, however, never admit it when they’re wrong and use countervailing proof to shore up their disproven theories.
My junior high chemistry teacher would have flunk my @ss for "fudging" like that. But I guess that prestigious "professors" can get away with calling it a "theory".
There's a bit of a contradiction in what you say here.
Some sort of effect has been observed and measured, which is why the idea of dark matter sprang up in the first place. The predictions of dark matter "didn't fit," i.e., the observations and measurements weren't quite right ... so they added another term.
Blaming the discrepancies on some sort of matter and energy is a pretty obvious choice for explaining phenomena related to the interaction between matter and energy....
The fact is that something is causing those observed and measured phenomena. Another fact is that we cannot see what's causing it. Either there's something out there that we cannot see, or there's a problem with the theories ... or both.