Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurker
[snip]
I agree with this... but Jerry, sometimes you are your own worst enemy. Your inability to ever admit that you might have been wrong about anything makes it difficult to support you. I think it would result in harmful precedents here if the mods banned you but I can't say that I would miss your tactics here...
|
To be fair to
Jerry, he has stated he was wrong, several times.
Here is an example:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Jerry: I want the corrections for relativistic effects removed from the SDSS and the data base stuck out there so we can look for trends that might be hidden by bad pipeline correction factors.
Nereid: (my bold) What "relativistic effects" are currently in the SDSS DR5
Jerry?
Jerry: The raw data does not correct for redshift, it contains a redshift estimate and a redshift confidence assessment for each object. (if I said otherwise, I was wrong.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Perhaps you may be pointing to a different aspect,
Lurker? An apparent lack of any 'back up the chain' corrections that one might expect would - logically - follow from "I was wrong"?
BTW, that same thread contains the confrontation between claim and experimental result wrt Pioneer 6.