Academic Bun Fight Over Gliese 581d: is it a False Positive or not?

Robertson et al who claimed Gleise 581d is a false positive did a bad analysis:

Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581”

Authors:

Anglada-Escudé et al

Abstract:

Robertson et al. (Reports, 25 July 2014, p. 440) claimed that activity-induced variability is responsible for the Doppler signal of the proposed planet candidate GJ 581d. We point out that their analysis using periodograms of residual data is inappropriate and promotes inadequate tools. Because the claim challenges the viability of the method to detect exo-Earths, we encourage reanalysis and a deliberation on what the field-standard methods should be.

pop sci write up.

No, we did not!

Response to Comment on “Stellar activity masquerading as planets in the habitable zone of the M dwarf Gliese 581”

Authors:

Robertson et al

Abstract:

Anglada-Escudé and Tuomi question the statistical rigor of our analysis while ignoring the stellar activity aspects that we present. Although we agree that improvements in multiparametric radial velocity (RV) modeling are necessary for the detection of Earth-mass planets, the key physical points we raised were not challenged. We maintain that activity on Gliese 581 induces RV shifts that were interpreted as exoplanets.