I did, thanks for the reference. It's very cool stuff if it pans out. Bear
in mind when you read it that it was all written by Frank himself, and there
is a natural human tendency to minimize the weight of disagreeable evidence.
>New news about getting peppered daily by icebergs...10 million a
>year...evidence mounts that this is indeed the case...
Frank hasn't published any technical article on his recent results. The
press releases sure look good, but so did the press releases on a bunch of
things that turned out to be bogus. It's impossible to judge his results at
this time.
>Also a sorry commentary on what happens to someone who dares to go against
>the status quo...apparently scientists aren't as "truth searching" as they
>would like us to beleive. Maybe if the truth were to fit established theory?
Let's see... he kept his job, lots of people discussed his theory, and the
government gave him several million dollars to put an instrument up on a
satellite to decide matters one way or another. The worst thing that
happened was that almost everyone told him he was wrong. Now, if he turns
out to be right, he becomes very famous and respected. It seems to me that
this is science working exactly the way it ought to. How would you have had
people act differently?
--CarlF