Notice that some poorly written pop-articles are showing up on time-travel… even by physicists.

My general criticism is that the nature of the problem is over-simplified for the purposes of writing short articles.

This is especially true when it comes to cosmology. There is a great deal of too-simple explanations of the key problems.

Mostly the authors ignore the horizon problem. It’s all too easy to ignore it. And then there is an even deeper, philosophical adjunct, which I also call the horizon problem - namely, we are limited by the speed of light in what we can actually observe. To make the assertion (as so many pop writers do) that what exists (ontology) is limited to what is observable (our horizon) is very anthropocentric.