Plate tectonics were accepted when the evidence became overwhelming, particularly the fossil and seismologic evidence. Yes, it took a a long time, because geology yields its secrets greedily, but it had nothing to do with attrition.
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > A good example of the validity of Planck's observation to "fit reality" is > to look at how plate tectonics were initially rejected, then embraced a > generation later. > > > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Joshua Cude <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck >>> >>> Max Planck: >>> >>> A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and >>> making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, >>> and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. >>> >>> >>> The irony is that not only is this not true, and that cold fusion is >> seeing it work the other way, but Planck himself is a counter-example. >> >> >> Some pathological beliefs, like N-rays and the planet vulcan, only really >> disappeared when the believers died. In cold fusion, the strongest and most >> active proponents are still the ones that were there from the beginning >> (There are some exceptions like Duncan and Zawodny). Cold fusion is likely >> to continue to fade away by attrition, although it clearly has a surprising >> staying power. >> >> >> Planck was slow to accept the idea of photons, but he did not have to die >> to increase their acceptance: about 10 years after Einstein introduced >> them, Planck came around. And of course, all the architects of modern >> physics, including Planck, were alive and well before they could conceive >> of relative time or discrete energy. So, the statement really doesn't fit >> reality, and I suspect he said it in jest. >> >> >> >> > >
