It's based on data, therefore many scientist could be wrong. As it says **observations of light** (data) bring us towards a closed model. Therore this would lead our actual scientist who supported a flat model to change their minds in to a closed or open model.

Question

Answer

Con: Investigating about this Alexandra Melchori, I found a tweet of hers from May 28, 2021 at 11:58 in which she says that she admires and misses a certain Bernardis who published an article that has more than 2000 citations, but that That's not all. In addition to this, I attach a link to another article that totally contradicts your refutation since its title reads like this: A flat Universe from high-resolution maps of the cosmic microwave background radiation.

Shape and size of the universe

It's based on data, therefore many scientist could be wrong. As it says observations of light (data) bring us towards a closed model. Therore this would lead our actual scientist who supported a flat model to change their minds in to a closed or open model.

Pros

Cons

Selected claim, opposing its parent

It's based on data, therefore many scientist could be wrong. As it says **observations of light** (data) bring us towards a closed model. Therore this would lead our actual scientist who supported a flat model to change their minds in to a closed or open model.

Con claim 1, children below

It's based on data, therefore many scientist could be wrong. As it says observations of light (data) bring us towards a closed model. Therore this would lead our actual scientist who supported a flat model to change their minds in to a closed or open model.