In article <3796003E.B4DF62B7 at erols.com>,
Bruce Lilly <blilly at erols.com> wrote:
> John wrote:
> >
> > Anyway, scientific knowledge is not available to all, most of us
implicitly
> > trust others and are in no position to independently verify a zilch
of what
> > we take as true.
>> That you *choose* not to verify something is irrelevant to the fact
that it is
> possible for you to do so.
>> > But remember that science has its own history of labelling and
> > burning. Bolztmann, many would not believe Einstein until 1919
eclipse
> > verification (he received his Nobel for the photo-electric effect).
There
> > are others, but the difference is that over time science recognizes
its
> > errors. The Church does too, it only took until 1992 until the
Catholic
> > Church officially recognized Galileo's rave and it wasn't until
1822 that
> > they actually condoned the publishing of material relating to the
same! Gee,
> > what's wrong with waiting half a millenium to catch up?
>> Well it could hardly be of any consolation (not to mention
reparation) to
> Galileo, who was tortured by the Inquisitioners.
>> Moreover, there are religious fundamentalists who do not accept any
changes to
> their dogma.
There are people in all segments of society who do not accept any
changes to their cherished beliefs. I notice you make no comment about
John's comment on testing relativity.
Pepermill
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
