Re: Rampant Pseudoscience in Astrophysics Brings Death
From: Creighton Hogg (wchogg_at_hep.wisc.edu)
Date: 06/10/04
- Next message: Andr? Michaud: "Re: QM and electron orbits"
- Previous message: Henry Spencer: "Re: beanstalks (was Re: Metallic hydrogen ...)"
- In reply to: gswork: "Re: Rampant Pseudoscience in Astrophysics Brings Death"
- Next in thread: Sky-High: "Re: Rampant Pseudoscience in Astrophysics Brings Death"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 11:17:15 -0500
On 10 Jun 2004, gswork wrote:
<snip>
> b) These theories are not often idle or intellect-free musings, they
> are often quite intricately constructed drawing on quite a broad cross
> section of skills and have clearly received quite some effort over
> time, even if they fall over due to an inconsitency on page 1. This
> makes them somewhat sad, a wasted effort perhaps, a lost intellect.
> Such is the commitment devoted to the theory that (ironically like the
> scientists they hold in low regard) the purveyor is unwilling to 'let
> go' of it.
>
> Overall i think a bit of crackpot theory is good, it stirs the pot
> (well, at least a good one can) and actually helps re-affirm the
> veracity of the theory they set out to depose by confirming that even
> a reasonably well thought out attempt to offer an alterantive doesn't
> cut it.
Well my two cents is that the difference between a "crackpot" theory and a
real theory is the person creating it. If this person is capable of
admitting error, learning from his mistakes, and understands the
importance of learning in detail the experimental results we currently
have and the rationale for currently used theory, then all is well.
Afterall, actual physicists come up with pretty crazy ideas all the time,
and when their crazy ideas work then all the better. When they don't
work, they move on with their lives.
What makes a person a "crackpot" is when they don't admit their mistakes,
don't look at the evidence, don't move on. Most of the time they seem to
develop a "prophetic" complex, where they begin to see themselves as the
lone voices of truth and reason in a world of conspiracy and corruption.
- Next message: Andr? Michaud: "Re: QM and electron orbits"
- Previous message: Henry Spencer: "Re: beanstalks (was Re: Metallic hydrogen ...)"
- In reply to: gswork: "Re: Rampant Pseudoscience in Astrophysics Brings Death"
- Next in thread: Sky-High: "Re: Rampant Pseudoscience in Astrophysics Brings Death"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|