XCHAOS: Nevim, jestli nutne musi "vitezit" zrovna jedna z techto dvou variant, pohybujeme se vzdy v ere interpretaci kosmu a urcite prijdou dalsi, v dusledku novych mereni.
A pozor, ja vubec nezpochybnuju data CMB namerena Planckem, WMAP nebo v Atacame.
Krome toho, jak jsem ti linkoval vedle, NASA prohrala dlouhy soud, ktery ji finalne naridil zverejnit data, ktera tvrdila, ze vubec neexistuji. Nasa nasledne zazrakem nasla 220 stran. Toto jsou fakta, zadne "me konspirace". A ano, NASA podle soudkyne jedna netransparentne, zdrzuje a hlavne sama pred soudem priznala, ze nici data.
" Kean filed a lawsuit against NASA in December 2003 in the U.S. District Court for D.C.[34]. The lawsuit sought to compel a proper search for any and all relevant records, including the elusive fragology files. This case, Kean v. NASA, turned into a protracted battle.
Over the next four years, NASA’s handling of the FOIA lawsuit drew criticism from the court. By 2006,
Judge Emmet Sullivan grew impatient with NASA’s “foot-dragging” and lack of transparency[35]. In late 2007, facing the judge’s ire, NASA agreed to a settlement: the agency would conduct a more exhaustive search of its files (across multiple centers and archives) and pay Kean’s legal fees (around $50,000)[35]. Importantly, NASA did not suddenly find the smoking-gun fragology file; but they did turn over whatever related documents they could gather. By 2008, NASA provided Kean with several hundred pages of records. These included things like internal email communications, memos, indexes of records, and some documents tangentially related to Project Moon Dust and satellite recoveries.
During a court hearing, NASA’s public liaison officer, Steve McConnell, testified under oath that two boxes of records from the 1960s were missing and presumed destroyed[36] – essentially confirming the fragology file loss. The court was satisfied that NASA had done all it reasonably could, given that major pieces of evidence were physically missing." https://www.theblackvault.com/casefiles/the-vault-files-the-1965-kecksburg-pennsylvania-crash/#2021Samozrejme, muzes argumentovat rozdilnym pravnim nazorem (na vec o ktere jsi zrejme nevedel?) nebo rict, ze soudkyne je konspiratorka, nebo postpravdive prohlasit ze "vsechno je digitalni artefakt".