Re: "Sagan and Velikovsky" to appear in local book stores
Joseph C. Larkin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
30 Jan 1995 16:00:31 GMT
Bruce Baugh (email@example.com) wrote:
> firstname.lastname@example.org (Richard A. Schumacher) wrote:
> :If the side of the Einstein correspondence held by Velikovsky's
> :heirs were the slightest bit supportive, why wouldn't they publish
> :it? The conclusion is that it helps V.'s case not a whit.
> And in any event there are two matters the Velikovskians aren't
> 1. Einstein was a kind and gentle man, encouraging to many people
> he didn't agree with (cf his relations with Zionists).
> 2. Einstein was wrong on one of the central discoveries of this
> century, quantum mechanics. Where there is one point of error,
> there may be others. So even if he _did_ support Velikovksian
> views, this is not in itself proof of the correctness of those
The whole discussion about what Einstein said or didn't, and what he
believed or didn't is silly. It is merely an appeal to authority.
Both sides here are arguing (falsely) that Einsteins opinions on
this matter are relavent. Since we don't even really know what
he thought about Velikovsky, the point is not wothy of discussion.