"Eric Prebys" wrote in message ...
"Dave" wrote in message
...

scientific papers? One of the big consequences of the paper was that
mainstream scientific journals stopped accepting anti-relativity papers
in the 1970s and anti-relativists came to be viewed as cranks.


Actually, I'm reading Martin Gardner's "Fads and Fallacies in the
Name of Science", which was written in 1952. He has a whole
chapter called "Down with Einstein", which makes it clear that
anti-relativists had already established themselves as
cranks in the 1950's.

The one sort of interesting things about the chapter was
that in 1952, there were still people who could remember the
"Newton-bashers" who had preceded the Einstein-bashers.

Oh, that's good.

And because I've learned from the history of science, I expect
relativity to one day show inadequacies and be replaced by something
better. When that time comes, the new theory won't please the
Einstein-bashers any more than the theory we have now does. But then
they'll be so busy bashing the new theory that they'll want to drag
the world back to relativity. Always one paradigm shift behind.

I believe the only "final truth" we can say about relativity is it's
good enough for now. One day it won't be. But whatever is wrong with
it, it's not "religion" to say it's not the things thrown out on this
newsgroup.

What's there to bash about Newton, anyway?