Funny thing I heard on the radio while driving up to work this morning...

I couldn't help thinking about 'viewpoints' when they made this statement about Galileo Galilei:"While the man stands somewhat as the icon of revolutionary thinking, (the idea of the earth not being the centre of the universe ended up being hard to sell) he basically just had a better telescope then the other people of his time. It lead him to see and be unable to ignore."

Mmmm. Bumpy lives for those that see, but fail to make others see... (and other interesting read on Copernicus)

Well, the mentioned radio-program generally does a better job at explain complex things in layman's wording then at being ultimately scientifically correct. In the process however they succeed at being thought-provocative. Hoping you can see it as just another viewpoint.

Ouch, worked too late this night, hard to even open my eyes this morning :-)

*UPDATE* Bruno triggers me with the obvious question: "But, how can we judge who is seeing more then the other?"

'fraid the question is as natural for humans to ask (always thinking cause-consequence) as it is utterly irrelevant. It is very much like Kurt stating: "there surely is uncertainty". And Alan adding onto it: "there is not even a (mechanical == cause/consequence driven) technique to recognise uncertainty"