I just wrote:
> In other words, if a hardcore creationist claims that Newtonian mechanics is due
> to the peculiar psychology of angels pushing planets around, is he incapable of
> producing correct calculations using G*M1*M2/r^2 ?
In the spirit of full disclosure, and given Harvey's evident exasperation as expressed
in another thread (Olga should look into Sasquatch and that WWII bomber on the moon?):
I'll skip ahead. My last point refers to the historical fact that Newton himself
was what we'd nowadays call a "hardcore creationist". By the "poisoned tree" model,
we should consider Newtonian mechanics suspect forever.
As a pancritical rationalist, I approve. But there's "suspect", and then there's
"suspect".
I wasn't so much baiting Harvey as trying to look into the issue of "right, for the
wrong reasons"--which I think is especially important when people are using slippery
words along with hidden agendas.
Comment?
MMB
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:10 MDT