Well, I put in my two cents. I think that Sean Carroll's work is worth every penny that is spent on it. I think that if you go down the road of blasting stuff as "fake science", you're treading very dangerous territory. Climate science is the first to go, as we have seen. It seemed to me that the tone of this thread was about whether it is legitimate science. It seems like a completely different thread to talk about how taxpayer research dollars should best be spent. For one thing, if you're worried about the money spent, that you have to take into account how much it costs. Theorizing about infinitely many universes is not more expensive than theorizing about just one.