Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-xxrs7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-19T06:19:26.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Drawing a gloriously false inference

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 April 2016

Stephen Jay Gould*
Affiliation:
Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

Extract

A stupid argument brings shame to any scholarly effort; but no dishonor attends an erroneous claim—especially in science, lest we all become psychological basket cases, because the vast majority of novel hypotheses turn out to be dead wrong. I would even grant substantial kudos to a class of claims that one of my colleagues, speaking of Emmanuel Velikovsky's neocatastrophic theories, called “gloriously wrong”—for this complex and radical argument enjoyed at least a glimmer of empirical plausibility, and would have annihilated most of our complacent beliefs about the nature of geologic change, had the evidence proved sound and the mechanism workable. But Venus turned out to be an old planet with a stable orbit, not a young comet, and the hypothesis of “worlds in collision” collapsed.

Type
Conceptual Index Fossils: Number 2
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Encelius, C. 1557. De re metallica. C. Egenolph, Frankfurt.Google Scholar