Yes, I do find it is interesting how much faith we have in something by it just being called scientific. But...<p>About the example of split couples finding themselves 95% or even 100% compatible with their ex's on dating sites: that can be used both ways. The ex's actually DID end up choosing each other and DID have some good times and were, day I say, "compatible" for a set period of time. Plus we're not even sure what drove the divorces in these examples. Did someone cheat? Was there a specific unforeseen event that happened? Heck, the ex's themselves didn't see the split coming in the beginning/match-making part of their relationship.
Have you heard of LikeBright.com? I just found it, but it uses Facebook friendship and "vouching" to play off the "met through a friend" method of finding a relationship.<p><i>shudder</i> If I had realized Match.com had bought OkCupid, I would've bailed much sooner. Ironically, days after I shelled out $5 because of OkCupid's seemingly understanding stance on AdBlock, I found my current girlfriend, and shortly thereafter, I closed my account. (I theorize they only match you with good matches once you give them money, especially the $5 once and done deal, where they will never get money from you again.)<p>Finally, you quote "concrete things like religion, wealth, and education have been associated with relationship happiness." Couldn't they be used in algorithms in a way to meaningful improve the usefulness of matching?