Still doesn't answer the question completely though. Are there other nerves that are involved with breathing and somehow originate lower? Do we know for sure that an injury beyond C5/C6 would NOT affect breathing?

Or is it only nerves from C5 and above that affect breathing?

I think there was a circle of people who were "in" and they did their best to make sure no one else gets ahead of them no matter how good they are. A status pro quo that existed for a long time. They weren't all of British boxing when it all started, but they were de facto British boxing for a while before it all fell apart.

You see this sort of thing everywhere if you look hard enough. Some nobody being good enough to win it all and never get support is a telling sign.

Sounds to me like boxing in Britain was most likely rife with corruption and had been so for a long time. 1960s is when it finally got so corrupt that not one of the established boxers could win for decades and a "nobody" finally won.

Come on you know exactly what I meant when I said flight was thought of as impossible. You know I didn't mean any flight, I meant human flight using machines.

I used flight as an example that many good ideas that improve our understanding of the world do not come from scientists who spend their lives studying the subjects. While there was a part of the scientific community helping flight, it was their (Orvilles) ideas that truly broke the ground on flight, and they weren't researchers who spent their entire lives only working on aeronautics. It's also well known that many people simply didn't believe it could be done.

And that's for a field of physics which has been researched for hundreds of years if not more.

Everything astrophysics touches is so new. Add to it that historically, people who research a certain subject are very averse to new ideas within the subject (because it threatens their standing in the field), and yet many advancements are made by people from outside the field who thought outside the little box those researchers drew.

I only used flight as an example of someone not following traditional or well-accepted knowledge to make a breakthrough.

It is very VERY likely that dark matter is just part of our equations being incorrect. I wouldn't be surprised if someone came up with better theories and equations that challenge our current understanding and result in doing away of dark matter altogether.

Many astrophysics researchers will call blasphemy if you doubt dark matter or go against what's currently accepted to be true. But I think that's only because they are territorial about their work and don't want to be proven wrong.

As a whole, the entire field and all concepts, including dark matter, are in it's infancy. It's very likely that we are wrong about a lot of it and need to keep an open mind.

Also when they near "fuck you this is my toy you can't take it from me" state