Jake Young is a 
It's all the lying that really gets me:
The universe could be 2 billion years older than thought, according to a new report by an international team of astronomers. The scientists have found that a nearby galaxy is 15% farther away than previous results suggested. That could mean the age of the universe is off by the same amount. But other experts think it's too early to draw such far-reaching conclusions.Astronomers have been able to determine relative distances of remote galaxies using observations of a particular type of star that periodically changes its brightness. But in order to know how many lightyears away all these galaxies are, they need to directly measure the distance between a few galaxies and our own Milky Way. Such measurements are hard to come by--for many years, the only galaxy for which a reliable distance has been determined is the nearby Large Magellanic Cloud, but some astronomers worry its unusual chemical makeup could skew calculations.
Read the whole thing.
Comments
Torbjorn Larsson seems to be quite skeptical that the age reported in this new study can be accurate.
Posted by: somnilista, FCD | August 8, 2006 3:27 PM
Oh this is heartache. It brought up similar problems for me -- a matter of credibility, straight up, right? You think you know a Universe, and this kinda thing happens. Plus we really can't say anymore, with any degree of certainty, if our Universe has been seeing other Universes too. Is ours the only one? And what if Universe has been lying because it has other things to hide, as you suggest w/r/t the pre-nup?
Posted by: Benjamin Cohen | August 8, 2006 3:33 PM
Here's my (rather long) take on this:
http://brahms.phy.vanderbilt.edu/~rknop/blog/?p=85
Posted by: Rob Knop | August 8, 2006 3:45 PM
Another new study reaches a different conclusion:
Chandra Independently Determines Hubble Constant
Posted by: somnilista, FCD | August 9, 2006 10:15 AM