View Single Post
  #34 (permalink)  
Old 20-October-2004, 09:39 PM
iantresman's Avatar
iantresman iantresman is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,383
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by russ_watters
1. The "experts" (with the exception of a tiny minority) are right (or, at least, pretty close).
2. The "experts" (with the exception of a tiny minority) are wrong, but believe they are right.
3. The "experts" (with the exception of a tiny minority) are wrong, know it, and are actively covering it up.

#2 requires that laymen can be smarter/more knowledgeable than most experts. As a layman and someone who respects the fact that guys like the BA have studied this for decades, I consider that possibility preposterous, pretentious, and arrogant.

#3 requires a vast, global conspiracy among mainstream scientists and is equally preposterous.
I thought history shows that most major changes in paradigm fall into category #2, including Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Big Bang theory. Originally most people thought they were wrong (scientists and leymen alike), but the new ideas turned out to be right-ish.

And as for a conspiracy, the evidence speaks for itself, see:Fortunately most scientists are honourable, impartial and objective individuals, but it's easy to see how one can become a little cynical.

Regards,
Ian Tresman[/list]