Post-fame syndrome.

“If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong”, Arthur C. Clarke

I slowly becoming aware of more and more cases. People who become famous for one thing either hold onto that fame by blocking the publication of all hints that something is wrong with their conclusions, or go off on a tangent and are treated as authorities even though they are plain wrong.

Eg.
Newton, correct about optics and gravity, wrong about alchemy.
Einstein, correct about special and general relativity, resistant to the correct explanation of quantum mechanics.
McBride, correct about Thalidomide, falsified lab data about Debendox.
Michael E. Brown, discovered Eris, and then went crazy about a new heavy ninth planet that couldn’t possibly exist.
Clyde Tombaugh, discovered Pluto, believed that UFOs were alien visitors.
Linus Pauling, two Nobel prizes for chemistry, went mad over promoting massive doses of vitamin C for curing colds.
Louis Alvares, proved the coincidence of asteroid impact and the death of the dinosaurs, rejects the coincidence of the Deccan volcanic eruptions and the death of the dinosaurs.
Edwin Hubble, discovered that the universe is expanding, rejected the big bang cosmology.
Lord Kelvin, discovered the laws of thermodynamics, rejected radioactivity and refused to believe the Earth’s age.
Cantor, revolutionised our understanding of infinity, published false proofs that infinitesimals don’t exist.
Denis Burkett, discovered Burkett’s lymphoma and connected it to the Epstein-Barr virus and found a cure, believed that food fibre prevented bowel cancer (it’s more complicated than Burkett believed).
Svante Paabo discovered Denisovans, called them Homo Altai which has been rejected.

And we see post-fame syndrome in the authorities rejection of true discoveries made by John Snow, Barry Marshall, and Rhie-Chow.

You don’t have to be famous to be wrong. But you do have to be famous in order to block publication of scientific truth.

I can’t help feeling that post-fame syndrome is far more prevalent than we think. It often takes at least 20 or 30 years to overturn a false claim by a famous person. And blocking of publication of scientific truth can hide that truth forever.

Add Galileo, who was right about something, I’m sure, but horribly wrong about the theory of beam bending, but his theory was accepted without question for about 200 years.

Rather than brilliant people going nutty in later years, I see the big problem as being that once a theory gets a certain status it is then accepted as the undeniable truth, in spite of all the bullshit about the scientific method not allowing such unquestioning acceptance of authority.

I await the new version of GR, and hope it doesn’t take another 100 years to get there.

Well we can look back and laugh now that we’ve got everything 100% correct.

We all need to follow the science people ( no matter what harm may come from it)

wookiemeister said:

We all need to follow the science people ( no matter what harm may come from it)

We could follow the religion people instead.

At least the harm that comes from that is well understood from centuries of doing it.

captain_spalding said:

wookiemeister said:

We all need to follow the science people ( no matter what harm may come from it)

We could follow the religion people instead.

At least the harm that comes from that is well understood from centuries of doing it.

Human psychology

With the vax it was known it was killing people, they continued anyway.

House insulation scheme causing fires they continued anyway.

Military project costing billions or up to a trillion and still doesn’t work – they continued anyway.

Adding something to water or food known to cause harm – they continued anyway.

Adding lead to petrol known to cause harm – they continued anyway, piston powered aircraft still use leaded fuel ( even in Australia I believe).

Asbestos know to cause harm – they continued using it anyway ( all those challenger tanks being blown up by the russian army are full of asbestos. If you were inspecting the tank you’d need a hazmat suit (?)).

Setting off nuclear bombs – known to cause harm – they continued doing it anyway.

Various scientists that have discovered one important thing then got another thing disastrously wrong is just part of the human condition – it’s why you need someone / team of intelligent men to evaluate things use the good things and recognise the stupid things ( we don’t have those men anymore). When it comes to nuclear power, climate change assuming you swing that way – it’s not viable in Australia, people are too stupid. Every work force ive encountered here are Negligent and stupid, I’ve watched as hundreds of millions of dollars of industrial plant got trashed by stupid people. Leave nuclear power to the professionals ( no one here). It’s true you COULD import professionals but on the whole they will be ignored and any warning they give will be ignored.

Religion is perhaps more honest – it asks you to leave all sensible reason at the door, its about killing the non believer. Judaism is all about homicidal maniacs wanting to kill everyone, like Islam and yes, even the hari Krishnas want to kill people.

Its not post fame syndrome but humans are fallible

Greetings

mollwollfumble said:

Post-fame syndrome.

“If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong”, Arthur C. Clarke

I slowly becoming aware of more and more cases. People who become famous for one thing either hold onto that fame by blocking the publication of all hints that something is wrong with their conclusions, or go off on a tangent and are treated as authorities even though they are plain wrong.

Eg.
Newton, correct about optics and gravity, wrong about alchemy.
Einstein, correct about special and general relativity, resistant to the correct explanation of quantum mechanics.
McBride, correct about Thalidomide, falsified lab data about Debendox.
Michael E. Brown, discovered Eris, and then went crazy about a new heavy ninth planet that couldn’t possibly exist.
Clyde Tombaugh, discovered Pluto, believed that UFOs were alien visitors.
Linus Pauling, two Nobel prizes for chemistry, went mad over promoting massive doses of vitamin C for curing colds.
Louis Alvares, proved the coincidence of asteroid impact and the death of the dinosaurs, rejects the coincidence of the Deccan volcanic eruptions and the death of the dinosaurs.
Edwin Hubble, discovered that the universe is expanding, rejected the big bang cosmology.
Lord Kelvin, discovered the laws of thermodynamics, rejected radioactivity and refused to believe the Earth’s age.
Cantor, revolutionised our understanding of infinity, published false proofs that infinitesimals don’t exist.
Denis Burkett, discovered Burkett’s lymphoma and connected it to the Epstein-Barr virus and found a cure, believed that food fibre prevented bowel cancer (it’s more complicated than Burkett believed).
Svante Paabo discovered Denisovans, called them Homo Altai which has been rejected.

And we see post-fame syndrome in the authorities rejection of true discoveries made by John Snow, Barry Marshall, and Rhie-Chow.

You don’t have to be famous to be wrong. But you do have to be famous in order to block publication of scientific truth.

I can’t help feeling that post-fame syndrome is far more prevalent than we think. It often takes at least 20 or 30 years to overturn a false claim by a famous person. And blocking of publication of scientific truth can hide that truth forever.

I don’t think Einstein had a “post-fame” era

mollwollfumble said:

Post-fame syndrome.

“If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong”, Arthur C. Clarke

I slowly becoming aware of more and more cases. People who become famous for one thing either hold onto that fame by blocking the publication of all hints that something is wrong with their conclusions, or go off on a tangent and are treated as authorities even though they are plain wrong.

Eg.
Newton, correct about optics and gravity, wrong about alchemy.
Einstein, correct about special and general relativity, resistant to the correct explanation of quantum mechanics.
McBride, correct about Thalidomide, falsified lab data about Debendox.
Michael E. Brown, discovered Eris, and then went crazy about a new heavy ninth planet that couldn’t possibly exist.
Clyde Tombaugh, discovered Pluto, believed that UFOs were alien visitors.
Linus Pauling, two Nobel prizes for chemistry, went mad over promoting massive doses of vitamin C for curing colds.
Louis Alvares, proved the coincidence of asteroid impact and the death of the dinosaurs, rejects the coincidence of the Deccan volcanic eruptions and the death of the dinosaurs.
Edwin Hubble, discovered that the universe is expanding, rejected the big bang cosmology.
Lord Kelvin, discovered the laws of thermodynamics, rejected radioactivity and refused to believe the Earth’s age.
Cantor, revolutionised our understanding of infinity, published false proofs that infinitesimals don’t exist.
Denis Burkett, discovered Burkett’s lymphoma and connected it to the Epstein-Barr virus and found a cure, believed that food fibre prevented bowel cancer (it’s more complicated than Burkett believed).
Svante Paabo discovered Denisovans, called them Homo Altai which has been rejected.

And we see post-fame syndrome in the authorities rejection of true discoveries made by John Snow, Barry Marshall, and Rhie-Chow.

You don’t have to be famous to be wrong. But you do have to be famous in order to block publication of scientific truth.

I can’t help feeling that post-fame syndrome is far more prevalent than we think. It often takes at least 20 or 30 years to overturn a false claim by a famous person. And blocking of publication of scientific truth can hide that truth forever.

What are the risks of the Heimlich maneuver? The Heimlich maneuver is considered a safe and quick method to save lives. You don’t have to have any medical knowledge or training to perform the Heimlich maneuver. However, if the Heimlich maneuver isn’t performed correctly, serious abdominal harm can be done.13 Aug 2021

Dispute Imperils Reputation of Heimlich Maneuver Inventor
By Kim OdeFebruary 4, 2007
MINNEAPOLIS — The American Red Cross last spring made a subtle change in its instructions for helping someone who is choking. Instead of specifying the Heimlich maneuver, it urged rescuers to do “five-and-five.” That’s five sharp back blows between the shoulder blades followed, if necessary, by five quick abdominal thrusts.

The Heimlich maneuver is an abdominal thrust, so the change was mostly semantic and probably would have gone unnoticed but for Peter Heimlich, son of the famous doctor Henry Heimlich.

For Peter Heimlich, the shift signaled success in his efforts to reveal what he calls his father’s “remarkable history of malfeasance and ethical misconduct.”