From: Michael Roberts (michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk)
Date: Sun Mar 23 2003 - 16:41:32 EST
Care on discovery by "accident". Fleming discovered first lysosyme and then
penicillin in the 1920s because he was researching into bacterial cultures
etc. Thought ere was some "chance" in his discovery he was looking for
something. However he didnt develop either finding . That was done by Florey
in Oxford who got a young biochemist Eric Roberts- my father - to purify
lysosyme and then found it was no use and then got Chain to look at
penicillin.
My point is few if any scientific discoveries are accidental. Accidental
discoveries only happen to scientists who are accident prone!!
Sorry I have exploded Burgy's middle reason.
Anyway I await IDs first discovery and bloodclots wont do!
Michael
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Burgeson" <burgythree@hotmail.com>
To: <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2003 11:20 PM
Subject: Re: thought experiment
> >>I think this needs fleshed out a bit more to clarify your scenario. Are
> >>you assuming that some supporting evidence is presented? If so, it
would
> >>seem worthwhile for the physics Nobel committee to look into. Relevance
> >>for the peace prize would depend on whether he wanted to distribute
these
> >>to any in need or if he was offering the highest bidder the chance to
set
> >>this up and then nuke everyone else with impunity. >>
>
> OK. Let's also assume that (1) Dr. X. presents all sorts of data and words
> relating to his search within the ID paradigm. (2) He also quite freely
> admits that his discovery was made accidently, much as Fleming's discovery
> of penicillin. (3) He also has published the requisite methodologies so
that
> anyone (with $10,000) can buy the needed materials and make his own
shield.
>
> You are on the nobel prize committee. Do you vote for him or not? If
not --
> what is your basis?
>
> Burgy
>
> www.burgy.50megs.com
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "bivalve" <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
> >Reply-To: <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
> >To: "John Burgeson" <burgythree@hotmail.com>
> >Subject: thought experiment
> >Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 16:42:51 -0500
> >
> > >A Gedanken experiment might be helpful here. Suppose an ID scientist,
> >let's call him Dr. X, working from ID concepts and such, predicts some
sort
> >of "force field" which is (a) inexpensive to set up, (b) does no damage
to
> >anything, and (c) inhibits atomic reactions. For $10,000 (say), any large
> >city in the world can be protected forever from an atomic explosion.<
> >
> > >Would you vote Dr. X. the Nobel peace prize? Or not? On what basis?<
> >
> >I think this needs fleshed out a bit more to clarify your scenario. Are
> >you assuming that some supporting evidence is presented? If so, it would
> >seem worthwhile for the physics Nobel committee to look into. Relevance
> >for the peace prize would depend on whether he wanted to distribute these
> >to any in need or if he was offering the highest bidder the chance to set
> >this up and then nuke everyone else with impunity.
> >
> > Dr. David Campbell
> > Old Seashells
> > University of Alabama
> > Biodiversity & Systematics
> > Dept. Biological Sciences
> > Box 870345
> > Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
> > bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
> >
> >That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted
> >Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at
> >Droitgate Spa
> >
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 16:57:57 EST