Einstein wasn't much one for consensus, scientific or otherwise. In 1931 a tract appeared entitled "100 Authors against Einstein". His response was "If I were wrong, one would be enough."
People concerned about global warming like to point to the question of consensus. I tend to think that in the area of forecasting 100 year trends, in climate or otherwise, it is not something of more than marginal significance.
I for one am pleased that Einstein didn't let himself be guided by the scientific consensus on the speed of light.
4 comments:
Thanks for that Gordo. I can now believe in a flat earth.
Believe what you will, my salient oversight. You must go where you think the evidence leads...
Hello Gordon, I just stumbled across this, and it is wrong on so many level. The "100 authors" document was basically Nazi propaganda designed to discredit Jewish scientists and, of course, Einstein was a major target. Einstein had already received widespread recognition for his work before this was published (he received the 1921 Nobel Prize). By the 1920s Einstein's fame was growing.
So what we have in the 1931 document is a minority arguing against the developing scientific consensus on Einstein's work for quite unscientific reasons. If we're going to draw parallels, I think you have things the wrong way around here!
I acknowledge what you say about the context, Martin, which I indicate in my post by noting the year in which the tract was published. The quote applies to the climate change debate, in my opinion, but for different reasons. And the analogy to the speed of light issue works, surely. Before Einstein, there was a settled consensus that was subsequently overturned by the appearance of new theories that better explained the observed data, which in any case was less complete than it was after the solar eclipse that proved Einstein's theories.
Perhaps quoting quotes is a practice more honoured in the breach than the observance ;-)
(to quote another quote that has burst the bounds of its original context)
Post a Comment