Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9076 total)
101 online now:
kjsimons, ringo (2 members, 99 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 893,958 Year: 5,070/6,534 Month: 490/794 Week: 116/89 Day: 14/24 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Galileo Was Wrong, Okay?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 318 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 26 of 54 (761349)
06-30-2015 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 12:45 PM


Re: RICKER REVIEW CONT:
The thesis of the film is that the most current scientific research does not support the heliocentric model that is accepted as correct by the scientific community.

That is, scientists think that what scientists think is wrong, and so scientists think that scientists should think something other than what scientists think.

This is even more bizarre than your delusions about cosmology.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 12:45 PM Suzanne Romano has taken no action

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 318 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 37 of 54 (761376)
06-30-2015 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Suzanne Romano
06-30-2015 4:42 PM


It seems to me one could "recalibrate" any hypothesis that way.

"There's an elephant in the back yard."

"An elephant?"

"Yeah, big gray thing, plain as the nose on your face."

"But if you look in the back yard, you'll see there is no big gray thing."

"OK, let me recalibrate the theory. The elephant's there, all right, but it's not gray, it's invisible."

"So the evidence for an elephant being there ... is that we see what we'd see if an elephant wasn't there?"

"Exactly!"

---

In fact, instead of "recalibrating" your hypothesis one bit at a time to hide from the evidence piecemeal, you could do it in one fell swoop by saying this:

The Earth stays still, but contrives to do so in such a way that whenever we put this hypothesis to the test we see exactly what we'd see if it was moving.

There, that's the whole of geocentrism done. You don't need any more arguments. It covers all the evidence against geocentrism found in the past, and all the evidence that will be found against it in the future. And yet this will not convince anyone who doesn't already have a strong religious prejudice in favor of being convinced, just as the "invisible elephant" excuse would leave you cold unless you were really desperate to believe in the elephant.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Suzanne Romano, posted 06-30-2015 4:42 PM Suzanne Romano has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022