"Neeum Zawan" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
news:4b11384d$1@news.povray.org...
> On 11/28/09 04:59, Warp wrote:
> > Invisible<voi### [at] devnull>  wrote:

> >> There was a time when all of humanity honestly believed the world was
> >> flat, and anybody who claimed it wasn't was *obviously* a lunatic.

> >    AFAIK that's an urban legend. "Popular history" so to speak.

> That's an urban legend if you're looking at "recent history". It
> wouldn't surprise me if 10,000 years ago everyone thought this. And if
> not then, keep going further back in time...

Sure, and at one point, all proto humans were hurling feces at each other.
None of this is relevant to the question of *modern* science investigating
paranormal *today*.

There are many myths about "establishment" of science wholesale laughing at
"maverick" thinkers who end up proving themselves, be it flat earth or
impossibility of heavier than air flight.

But there's a deeper issue here as well besides rewriting history to fit a
hollywood theme: If someone makes the correct (as proven later) prediction
based on faulty reasoning and/or insufficient data, are those contemporaries
laughing at him correct in doing so or not? With billions of people
expressing billions of opinions today, some are bound to make predictions
that, to a future generation, may appear to be spot on. But if that person,
at this time, is unable to provide supporting evidence or articulate a
reasoning for his prediction, I feel I would be correct at laughing at him.

Post a reply to this message