From: david@edenroad.demon.co.uk
On Fri, 09 Feb 2007 10:33:06 -0800, hermes wrote:
> On Feb 8, 11:09 pm, David Mitchell wrote:
>> Still confused as to why you think it's relevant.
>
> I've been trying to criticize a phrase written by David Mitchell
>
>> either because they lack the appropriate faculties, or the education.
>
> My point is (I am repeating myself) two educated and intelligent
> persons may, in certain circumstances, arrive at different conclusions
> (or even opposite conclusions) on a given subject, even after thorough
> discussions.
Well, duh.
This is not the point, and not what I said, which was "the people I'm
trying to help", with reference to posters in this newsgroup.
You then hared off on a tangent, involving famous historical disagreements.
No-one disputes that people sometimes disagree; but _that's not what I was
talking about_!
> This is more likely to happen if the subject is difficult
> or delicate. This is no reason for any of the parties to put inelegant
> or offensive labels on the other. The controversies I cited took years
> to get solved, and actually Einstein's objections to quantum theory
> were never completely overpassed.
Yes they are, see below.
> I will politely ignore David's comments about Einstein's lack of
> imagination.
Why? It's perfectly reasonable, given that AFAIK every working physicist
believes that QM _does_ include completely random events, despite
Einstein's protestations.
He was also, BTW, wrong about the Cosmological Constant (or, at least,
wrong about being wrong).
--
=======================================================================
= David --- If you use Microsoft products, you will, inevitably, get
= Mitchell --- viruses, so please don't add me to your address book.
=======================================================================
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
