I agree with regard to how science is done. It's not up to the majority
in science . It's up to the evidence. Science is NOT a democracy nor a
dictatorship. You don't vote what truth is, any more than you tell
someone what it is. The minority view typically becomes the majority,
and generally accepted over time when evidence is proved. Those with
ulterior motives, false pride, huge egos, or are afraid of changing the
status quo are as bad as corrupt politicians. When politics enters
science the science suffers. The whole idea behind science is not to
prove yourself right, but to find evidence that proves a hypothesis,
regardless of who that hypothesis disagrees with. Peoples' egos are
unimportant in the pure scientific process because emotion has no place
in pure science.
Regards,
Eric
On 3/20/2011 12:05 PM, Spaceguard wrote:
On 20/03/2011 17:58, JoshuaTreeMuseum wrote:
Looks like Cardiff has had enough of the screwey panspermia
balderdash dished out by this guy.
Summum Luna,
Phil Whitmer
-----------------------------
"Screwy" perhaps, but no one has yet to refute his hypothesis in a
credible way. While I think that he might be a bit extreme on some
subjects no one can deny that his work has been rigorously
scrutinised, and, so far, stands up to that scrutiny.
Apart from that, the Astrobiology Centre has conducted a lot of world
class research, and has been published in many peer-reviewed
publications. It has also sent the occasional ripple through the
establishment - and that is how science is done.
Jay Tate
The Spaceguard Centre
http://www.spaceguarduk.com
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at
http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
______________________________________________
Visit the Archives at http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
Meteorite-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
