Undermines· strongCCC-E008
DeAbreu, Contreras & Scott 2015: proponents' own parameters, Planck data, same verdict
- what the source states
- "We are able to reproduce the analysis these authors presented for data from the WMAP satellite and we confirm the existence of these apparently special directions in the newer Planck data. However, we also find that these features are present at the same level of abundance in simulated Gaussian CMB skies, i.e. they are entirely consistent with the predictions of the standard cosmological model."
- what we infer
- Methodologically the strictest of the circle reanalyses: it froze the search parameters to the proponents' own published choices (a de facto prespecification), extended the search to Planck data, and still found the features at chance abundance. The proponents' published response is that it did not repeat the sky-twist ellipticity test and did not explain the anisotropy of the centers — both true, both recorded (CCC-E006, CCC-C504).
- limitations
- Did not test the sky-twist/ellipticity statistic, which the proponents regard as their strongest point.