[longshadow]

Geez, all the guy said was that for all our knowledge we still don't know a damn thing about the universe. I'd say thats an extremely safe statement....

from #62:

"If our knowledge of the Universe is so paltry, how is that the angular power spectrum predictions [of the] Lamda-CDM model fit the actual measured data so well?"

[beezdotcom]

"If our knowledge of the Universe is so paltry, how is that the angular power spectrum predictions [of the] Lamda-CDM model fit the actual measured data so well?"

Ummm...because we know enough to make predictions that are borne out by the data.

I notice you've never bothered to tell me how much more there is to learn. Shouldn't take you long - what, only one or two nuggets of knowledge left, yes?

[gore_sux]

Maybe you should take a closer look on a more local level before jumping to the origins of the universe:

' Tenth Planet' Bigger Than Pluto

Astronomers Had it Wrong: Most Stars are Single

The Universe: The new Axis of Evil

Big Bang Theory Challenged -- Many Stars May Be Living Unseen

It seems to me that your models and theories are still in a state of flux, while the original statement "we don't know jack squat about the universe" still stands as fact.

The very link you provided has several "corrections" made by scientists on previous "knowledge":

New Age for the Universe

This could be a case where the effects of good Italian wine overwhelmed the scientific super-ego of Kolb et al.