>From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On
>Behalf Of Jonathan Clarke
>Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 2:14 PM
>Cc: Asa@Calvin. Edu
>Subject: Re: Distance of spiral nebulae
>Glenn Morton wrote:
>> I find so many parallels between what Whewell did and what RTB
>is doing with
>> anthropology that it utterly amazes me.
>You are repeating this assertion without any evidence. I really
>think your projecting
>your quite legitimate concerns about RTB onto a different person and era.
I really have one question. Have you actually been reading what I have been
posting? I posted these facts using quotations from Whewell:
1. Whewell in his own words KNEW of the data from the Rosse telescope.
2. Whewell in his own words KNEW that the nebula resolved into stars
3. The Rosse telescope was the largest on earth for around 80 years
4. Whewell decided that the 'stars' were comets
5. Whewell also made strange claims for stars, saying that they were not of
the same density as the sun and therefore were not suitable for life.
I have yet to see you post a quotation from Shapley saying that the points
of light in the nebula were not stars (in spite of repeated assertions to
that effect.) If you don't have the data then why are you asserting this?
I posted a list of issues in the 1920 debate between Shapley and Curtis
compiled by a historian and the issue of the nebula points of light being
anything other than stars was not among them. So exactly what is your basis
for saying what you are saying other than your personal belief?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 25 2002 - 00:24:11 EST