I read a book on California geography recently, written recently, and it made the fascinating point that while the new theory of continental drift is now accepted, the opponents having died off, there are still hundreds of years of observational data that have not been interpreted according to the new theory. So very few maps, e.g., label rocks as former sea floor, tho writing now that is clearly where the rocks are from.
So even once there is a shift, it takes time for the new obvious to percolate through all the habitual ways of seeing. Thanks, --Chris 301-270-6524 On Apr 19, 2013 12:21 AM, "Joe" <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike, > > Why, it's going to take ...a shift! Just as you call it. > > What could cause a shift, or give a push to it?: a Discovery. What could > enable a discovery? An observation. What could allow an observation? A > lack of prejudice. > > On the other hand, serendipity operates often in Science. Sometimes, all > you have to do is look pointedly for ONE thing, and you find something > else. And that something else is BIG. So, let's just let Science work. > Time wounds all heels! > > (fingers crossed). > > Nah, I'm not upset. And, a little sadness helps my meditation. Which > could be good for Science. We'll see! No promises... . ;-) > > --Joe > > > "mike" <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > > > Joe, > > > > I'm not a scientist (quite obviously!), so I didn't know what kind of a > state it was in. What's it going to take for the revolutionary paradigm > shift that it sounds like it needs? > > > > Mike > > > > Ps It's ok not to respond if the subject upsets you. > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are > reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >
