On 26/09/2016 09:05, David Mitchell wrote:
I have every sympathy with Alistair on this. Science, physics, whatever have their place and can't be argued with on this issue. (But should really, as that's what science is about).

However, sometimes in life there are ways of explaining things that challenge the accepted definition and I totally understand his point and it's actually a very interesting idea. Wrong but interesting. But it actually gets the point across well.

I'm pretty sure that last time this was discussed I drew an analogy with
phlogiston:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory
Quite an elegant theory that explained the experimental results but
ultimately turned out to be back to front, when materials burned they
didn't lose phlogiston, but *gained* oxygen!

Scientists will not comprehend that at all, but those with open minds will get it.

Incidentally, I have cold radiators.



--
Col

Bolton, Lancashire
160m asl
Snow videos:
http://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3QvmL4UWBmHFMKWiwYm_gg