No, thinking outside the box is wonderful. Hoyle, Zwicky, Bethe (I think it was), lots of wonderful scientists have been renowned for it. Sloppy thinking, incorrect facts, refusal to accept disproof--this is bad science. From what I've read Hoyle was exceptional in that he was capable of doing rock-solid research and also pursuing speculative, even outrageous ideas. Bouw's claims are well outside conventional astonomy, but he also admits that he is guided by theology and not science.

Say, for a tour of the loony side of pseudoscience, check out Crank.net. The people listed are also 'outside the box' but I'm not sure how clearly some of them are thinking...*grin*

--Don Stahl

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: DStahl on 2002-03-25 20:32 ]</font>