"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:47:50 -0700, "Capt. JG"
said:

I don't think you can count the
Church as a peer, and we know how that worked out for him and Giordano.

Not at all that's a distinction that makes sense. From what I've observed,
environmentalism seems today's equivalent of Catholicism in Galileo's day.
Woe be it to anyone who reads the global warming scripture in a manner
different from that of the religion's high priests.


So, you're saying that when the vast majority of scientists accept
something, and another non-peer-reviewed person claims otherwise, the
scientists burn them at the stake? Or, do they just say they're wrong and
ask them to justify their claims? You're stretching the metaphor to the
point where it doesn't make sense. No non-peer-reviewed scientist dies or is
confined to house arrest because of a differing view. Wikipedia is a good
example.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com