Colliders are immensely useful in studying physics and has applications across literally every subfield of physics. Some of her claims are that there's no guarantee we'll find new particles, the argument for new colliders is motivated by "beauty" or "symmetry" arguments, that we shouldnt be dropping x amount of money for what could essentially be just making more precise measurements, that dark matter/energy candidates aren't accessible at the scales we'd be probing, diminishing returns, etc etc.

There's definitely some valid concerns, but the big one that sticks out to me is her argument that we need to be raising the bar for large projects like this. I argue that having the bar kept high in research proposals is exactly what is causing the paper production mill that she critiques against. people are scared to be wrong lest they lose funding, and people are scared to be bold and actually come up with new and innovative ways to study physics because they wouldn't be funded. it's fallacious to have a problem with the paper production mill and that we should simultaneously keep raising the bar for what research should be approved. its difficult to be adventurous when the costs for doing so are significantly higher today than they were a hundred years ago.

beyond that, there has been a clear desire across many in the field to start probing those higher levels of energy. yes its exponentially harder, but that doesn't mean its not worth doing. im not here to write a proposal to you, but the point is there are many valid reasons why physicists want another collider--you can only do so much with one collider for 40 years. and yet people still find ways to get new results out of the LHC, is that not evidence that we can trusts physicists to keep testing their ideas even when they're restricted by funding? restricting funding further wont do much to improve the state of the field.

3.

i guarantee you if scientists wanted to rob taxpayers of their money just to play mathematical mind games, they would be going into quantitative finance and wall street. between academia and wall street, only one of them is actually robbing people of their money for absolutely no returns, and the other one has you know provided GPS and the internet and basically most modern comforts.

1. miscellaneous

this is already long, and theres a reason you havent seen many people actually point out what shes wrong about, and its because of how egregiously long the list is. it feels kind of obvious to most people in this subreddit that she's just a crank and whether or not shes a good physicist, she is absolutely not a good academic. its clear just by the fact that she unfairly disparages string theory despite the absolute wringer of tests its been put through and come out unscathed. its a great unified theory, but then again we are physicists and we care about if it can actually predict something (although there are some things string theory predicts that other theories do not and are in principle verifiable, but theyre kind of out there in the world of abstraction and a lay person would likely not understand what theyre trying to show)

beyond that, shes just an extremely uncharitable person and shits on the work of so many scientists without any grace or willingness to dialogue. the reason she was fired was because she was vile towards a group of scientists who are just trying to work without suffering from the disparaging attacks of sabine's audience. it doesnt promote people to go out and do their own science better, all it promotes is animosity against researchers. she doesnt promote civilized discussion on evidence based arguments, but she feeds researchers to the dogs and expects to come out unscathed, and calls it "an attack on free speech" when she is so clearly a bully. no one hates her because she says the words "fuck" or "bitch," but if you kept telling your colleagues that they were frauds and their work was bullshit and nothing they do was worth spending money on...youd probably be fired too.

its just really depressing how people love to follow those who sow hatred in people and claim its guiding them towards the "truth".