Find me a Ph.D to argue that the sky is bright orange, that the english language doesn’t exist, and that all humans have at least seventeen arms and a maximum lifespan of ten minutes.
These claims would be beyond the border of lunacy for any person, but still, I’m sure you’ll find people with doctorates who have gone crazy and claim such things.
But more relevantly, Richard’s point definitely stands when it comes to outlandish ideas held by people with relevant top-level academic degrees. Here, for example, you’ll find the website of Gerardus Bouw, a man with a Ph.D. in astronomy from a highly reputable university who advocates—prepare for it—geocentrism: http://www.geocentricity.com/
(As far as I see, this is not a joke. Also, I’ve seen criticisms of Bouw’s ideas, but nobody has ever, to the best of my knowledge, disputed his Ph.D. He had a teaching position at a reputable-looking college, and I figure they would have checked.)
He had a teaching position at a reputable-looking college, and I figure they would have checked.
It looks like no one ever hired him to teach astronomy or physics. He only ever taught computer science (and from the sound of it, just programming languages). My guess is he did get the PhD though.
Also, in fairness to the college he is retired and he’s young enough to make me think that he may have been forced into retirement.
Here, for example, you’ll find the website of Gerardus Bouw, a man with a Ph.D. in astronomy from a highly reputable university who advocates—prepare for it—geocentrism:
Earth’s sun does orbit the earth, under the right frame of reference. What is outlandish about this?
Earth’s sun does orbit the earth, under the right frame of reference. What is outlandish about this?
If you read the site, they alternatively claim that relativity allows them to use whatever reference frame they chose and at other points claim that the evidence only makes sense for geocentrism.
I’m not sure it is completely stupid. Consider the argument in the following fashion:
1) We think your physics is wrong and geocentrism is correct.
2) Even if we’re wrong about 1, your physics still supports regarding geocentrism as being just as valid as heliocentrism.
I don’t think that their argument approaches this level of coherence.
Emile:
These claims would be beyond the border of lunacy for any person, but still, I’m sure you’ll find people with doctorates who have gone crazy and claim such things.
But more relevantly, Richard’s point definitely stands when it comes to outlandish ideas held by people with relevant top-level academic degrees. Here, for example, you’ll find the website of Gerardus Bouw, a man with a Ph.D. in astronomy from a highly reputable university who advocates—prepare for it—geocentrism:
http://www.geocentricity.com/
(As far as I see, this is not a joke. Also, I’ve seen criticisms of Bouw’s ideas, but nobody has ever, to the best of my knowledge, disputed his Ph.D. He had a teaching position at a reputable-looking college, and I figure they would have checked.)
Here is another one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtney_Brown_%28researcher%29
It looks like no one ever hired him to teach astronomy or physics. He only ever taught computer science (and from the sound of it, just programming languages). My guess is he did get the PhD though.
Also, in fairness to the college he is retired and he’s young enough to make me think that he may have been forced into retirement.
Earth’s sun does orbit the earth, under the right frame of reference. What is outlandish about this?
If you read the site, they alternatively claim that relativity allows them to use whatever reference frame they chose and at other points claim that the evidence only makes sense for geocentrism.
Oh. Well, that’s stupid then.
I’m not sure it is completely stupid. Consider the argument in the following fashion:
1) We think your physics is wrong and geocentrism is correct. 2) Even if we’re wrong about 1, your physics still supports regarding geocentrism as being just as valid as heliocentrism.
I don’t think that their argument approaches this level of coherence.