I posted the following response to
Motl's comments about the Time magazine article on superstring theory.
The article hardly seems to warrant your "physics is a sin" response. Other than engaging in ad hominem attacks, you haven't really explained why you disagree with the article. That hardly seems like science to me. What's up?
He gave me the following reply, which I thought I'd reproduce here.
Dear Alberto,
I won't be explaining why I disagree with the article because this is not a matter of agreement or disagreement. The article is a pile of vitriolic nonsense and conspiratory theories written by rather incompetent people and, in my opinion, there is nothing in the article that merits a scientific discussion. I apologize but if you need someone who will be commenting every sentence of every vitriolic author with high-school physics education, you will be disappointed.
It is up to you whether you believe that I/we know what we're saying or not. Be aware that if you choose to take the Time magazine more seriously than my fast comment, I won't think that you are an intelligent person.
Best
Lubos
No comments:
Post a Comment