[snarks_when_bored]

Veneziano's article (see AntiGuv's link in Post #73) contains a bit of discussion of Steinhardt's views. If you haven't read it, it's a fine article, albeit a couple of years old.

[RightWhale]

Steinhardt et al. got partway there. Odds are they are moving even farther along their isoclines even now but need to give the turntable a sharp rap.

[longshadow]

from one of the technical papers that goes with the new data; here's the "money shot":

9. Conclusions

The standard model of cosmology has survived another rigorous set of tests. The errors on the WMAP data at large ℓ are now three times smaller and there has been significant improvements in other cosmological measurements. Despite the overwhelming force of the data, the model continues to thrive. The data are so constraining that there is little room for significant modifications of the basic CDM model. The combination of WMAP measurements and other astronomical measurements place significant limits on the geometry of the universe, the nature of dark energy, and even neutrino properties. While allowing for a running spectral index slightly improves the fit to the WMAP data, the improvement in the fit is not significant enough to require a new parameter.

source:

Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Three Year Results: Implications for Cosmology/>

Hopefully, somebody here can translate the geek-speak details in the paper into something a layman can comprehend.