Re: Old Earth Theories: a radiological perspective

[elw1@ix.netcom.com (Edwin Wright)]

First let me say that I do not beleive that this thread (old earth 
theories) belongs on Radsafe. There are news groups that offer the 
opportunity to discuss these types of topics.

That said, here are my comments:

Bernard Cohen wrote: 
>
>Have you tried to publish this in a refereed scientific journal?

That may not be the place this subject would receive objective reviews. 
What I have observed is that if your subject/conclusions AGREE with the 
mind-set of the reviewer, you get a favorable review. Human nature 
dictates that we accept what fits OUR picture of the world and reject 
all others, right or wrong. For centuries people thought the world was 
flat or at the center of the universe. But that didn't make their 
THEORY correct. They went so far as to execute those who stead fastly 
refused to accept these fundamental truths.

>That way, it gets carefully refereed by experts on the various
>subjects.

Copernicus waited to publish his theory of the universe until he was on 
his death bed. Kelper waited until his mentor was dead before he 
completed his work on the solar system. Even Einstein's theory came 
under considerable attack when it was first published. Need I say more 
on the subject of peer review by so called experts.

>They also sometimes give useful suggestions.

This statement is only true if the reviewer can look at the material in 
a totally objective manner. That is, without inflicting his/her own 
prejudices onto the author. A difficult task for any person, especially 
if the theory discredits their core beleifs.

A good example is global warming. Scientific evidence demonstrates that 
it may NOT be occuring. Yet very reputable scientists have chosen to 
OMIT critical data in order to continue the theory that global warming 
is taking place and it is caused by our way of life.

Edwin L. Wright, CHP

elw1@ix.netcom.com