Adam Zachary Wasserman
Feb 10 · 1 min read

I read your article because you advertised (by way of headline) that your point of view was:

“Researchers accidentally create a “Mini Big Bang” in the Lab”,


“No Way of Knowing if Researchers accidentally created a “Mini Big Bang” in the Lab since we cannot go back in time to compare.”

Additionally, if your point of view is really that we have no way of knowing, why did you write this:

“We may be a step closer to understanding the phenomenon of Big Bang a little better after a team of researchers from the University of Central Florida (UCF) accidentally created conditions necessary to produce a ‘Mini Big Bang’ in the Lab.”

This is a definitive statement that could easily mislead a casual reader to believe that we do ion fact have a way of knowing.

I appreciate your dialogue with me, but regretfully your explanations do nothing to change my basic opinion of your article — that it is irresponsible click bait. Too bad, it could have been interesting if you had refrained from sensationalism.

    Adam Zachary Wasserman

    Written by

    IT strategist, Startup positioner, Cargo cult programmer.

    Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
    Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
    Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade