In reply to Michael Foster's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2005 23:13:58
-0500 (EST):
Hi,
[snip]
Actually, I think that problem that has sickened science
is not the craving for certainty. It is the compulsion to
consensus that has caused the outrageous behavior of the
scientific community toward its
Michael Foster wrote:
Actually, I think that problem that has sickened science
is not the craving for certainty. It is the compulsion to
consensus that has caused the outrageous behavior of the
scientific community toward its greatest innovators.
Consensus science is, after all, not
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Zell, Chris wrote:
Does anyone see anything DRAMATICALLY WRONG with this event? They
describe the discovery as bloody obvious and say that they were
shunned and labeled as eccentric. More than that, decades of
modern medicine fail to correctly identify the simple cause
In reply to William Beaty's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2005 11:28:48
-0800 (PST):
Hi,
[snip]
Ridiculed, vindicated scientific discoveries
http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html
According to the Russians, T. Gold got his theories from them.
[snip]
I think we have Emperor's clothes effect to thank.
- Original Message -
From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subconsciously all humans crave certainty, which is why we are so unwilling to give it up just when we think we have hold of a large chunk of it. Of course in reality, there is no such thing as certainty, so our
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 27 Nov 2005 16:21:04
-0500:
Hi,
From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subconsciously all humans crave certainty, which is why we are so
unwilling to give it up just when we think we have hold of a large
chunk of it.
Of course in reality,
Robin wrote:
Subconsciously all humans crave certainty, which is
why we are so unwilling to give it up just when we
think we have hold of a large chunk of it.
Of course in reality, there is no such thing as
certainty, so our struggle is either endless, or
we settle for delusion.
See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4307826.stm
So, two guys get a Nobel prize for discovering that a bacterial
infection causes ulcers. A simple antibiotic cures the problem.
Does anyone see anything DRAMATICALLY WRONG with this event? They
describe the discovery as bloody obvious
8 matches
Mail list logo
