Re: "Sagan and Velikovsky" to appear in local book stores
Henrique Leitao (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Fri, 27 Jan 1995 11:32:28 +0100
On Thu, 26 Jan 1995, Gerry Palo wrote:
> [Lenghty but very interesting comment]
> To seriously interpret Einstein's meaning would for any biographer require
> corroborating evidence. As it stands, the statement, assuming that
> Einstein did make it as quoted, is open to interpretation. Likewise,
> Velikovsky's statements about their conversations contradict the whole
> sense which the ant-Velikovskian exegetes here try to read into the
> fragment. In both his references to his relationship to Einstein,
> Velikovsky takes great care to characterize as precisely as possible
> Einstein's views, which did change in the course of time, right up to the
> time of his death. One does not get the feeling at all that he was
> trying to fabricate or exagerate or read anything into Einstein's words
> that was not there. But none of this comes into serious consideration at
> all, only the single colloquial expression, which is treated as holy writ.
Amen. Finally someone took five minutes to *think* before posting.
The number of charlatans that invoke "scientific" status to their ideas
is, of course, a nuisance. But, what upsets me the most is the arrogance
and contempt with which the High Priests of Science (for example Sagan)
defend the dogmas of the present scientific establishment. Philosopher
Paul Feyerabend spoke cogently on this but apparentely was not heard...