Reminds me of the story a doctor told me one time about the guy who came up with the pap smear. All of his peers in the medical community told him he was crazy to step outside of normal procedures and take a thought that wasn't stamped and approved by the majority. Now his idea is standard procedure.
And the difference is that his idea worked. When ideas work science accepts them. When there is no experimental evidence they look upon the idea with great caution. When there is contradictory evidence they downplay that idea. That is one of the things the Sabine was getting to in her article. Maybe you should go and look at the whole of the article instead of just jumping on an idea that you don't agree with.
And that is about enough of that. If somebody wants to discuss the overall ideas in the article I will be happy to respond.
Bill Gill
