Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: From many - one.
Why do you seem to have a problem with this concept?

A theory is not disproven by pointing out occasional acts of academic misconduct, or even outright fraud. There are tens of thousands of scientists, and a few have disgraced themselves. (Similarly, a religion is not discredited because of the personal flaws of a few clergymen.) A demonstration of fraud could be a successful attack on a theory, but only if the theory can't survive without the fraudulent material.

156 posted on 05/23/2005 10:17:25 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. The List-O-Links is at my homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry

Good stuff. I shoud have included that in my original reply, but, of course, didn't think if it. Thanks, I'll store it in a corner of my brain for the inevitable next time.


160 posted on 05/23/2005 10:23:41 AM PDT by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]

To: PatrickHenry

Well stated, for any academic discipline!

I don't think this thread has the legs for 7,000 posts, but it always is interesting. Sort of like the difference between a 4 week vacation, and a stop at a park for a picnic.

They're both good, but for different reasons.


163 posted on 05/23/2005 10:30:39 AM PDT by ColoCdn (Neco eos omnes, Deus suos agnoset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson