Where did the universe come from? Atheistic origin science has no answer.

[Huggy Bear]

Tonus won't answer because he would destroy his own argument.

As you note, it's not a complicated question. It's just irrelevant, and yet another attempt at going off on a tangent. It's a way for you to avoid the actual issue while trying to pretend that you're making a point.

But it is relevant, your quote:

It means that additional work has yielded additional information that makes the measurements more accurate. Not obsolete.

In what world does newer more accurate data, not make the older less accurate data obsolete?

hence my question.

"If you find new data that is more accurate, do you continue using the old data?"

How is the question irrelevant?

---

not only that, the claim that the golden ratio created beauty has been around since ancient times.

So what? It's also been claimed since ancient times that the Hindu Vedas were uncreated. A claim doesn't make it true. Facts do. Or in this case, they don't.

My point was, the body types considered beautiful in ancient times differ from now, so using swimsuit models to prove the claim wrong is just absurd.