Re: Bipedalism and theorizing... was Re: Morgan and creationists
Thomas Clarke (clarke@acme.ucf.edu)
6 Jul 1996 13:59:49 GMT
In article <4r7cus$lif@kira.cc.uakron.edu> david8@dax.cc.uakron.edu (david l burkhead) writes:
>In article <836132307snz@crowleyp.demon.co.uk> Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk writes:
>
> I've seen that "quote" many times. I've never seen an original
>source for it those. To me, that makes it at least potentially
>apocryphal. OTOH, it really doesn't matter. If he actually said it,
>he was wrong. In fact, the theory he helped found became generally
>accepted among physicists in remarkably short order.
I think I posted it before, but here it is straight out of Bartlett's
Familiar Quoatations:
"An important scientific innovation rarely makes it way by gradually
winning over and converting its opponents; it rarely happens that Saul
becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponenets gradually die out and
that the growing generation is familiarized with the idea from the
beginning.
Max Planck (1858-1947) _The Philosophy of Physics_ (1936)
Physicists have very short generations :-)
> As has been repeatedly demonstrated to you (however much you may
>refuse to accept simple facts presented to you), "continental drift"
>as a hypothesis was simply wrong. It was, and is to this day,
>rejected on that basis.
I have to jump in:
but "as been repeatedly demonstrated to you" continental motion
as a fact is right. Wegener's mechanism was wrong, no one disagrees
about that. But he was right that continents move.
Tom Clarke
Sharpening his verbal axes through usenet posting.
|