# Scientific "Facts **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 31, 2011, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653 "2011-01-31T15:39:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/61 "2011-02-02T06:20:07Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > I looked but haven’t found any indication that there still remained any doubt about plate tectonics by 1975. I agree that plate tectonics seems to have been definitely the dominant model in geology by then, but that doesn’t mean it was wrong at the time to point out that it was relatively new and still undergoing experimental verification. There was a study by Nitecki et al. as late as 1978 on which practicing geologists accepted plate tectonics and which didn’t, so I think it may be a bit of an exaggeration to say that there absolutely wasn’t any doubt about it. > [@Johanna](#): > > Except maybe for old fogies who had outlived their time and couldn’t adapt to new knowledge… Well, it’s easy in hindsight to diss more cautious recipients of a new theory as “old fogies who couldn’t adapt”, but I’m not sure it’s always valid. Especially when the adaptation timeframe in question is only a few years. ---
**Author:** ![GuanoLad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guanolad/32/42_2.png) [@GuanoLad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GuanoLad)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 6:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/62 "2011-02-02T06:51:36Z")
When I was at school, the scientific consensus was that there was a planet named Pluto! Those wacky ignorant scientists and their crazy ideas! ---
**Author:** ![naita](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/naita/32/5862_2.png) [@naita](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/naita)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 8:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/63 "2011-02-02T08:19:00Z")
> [@johnpost](#): > > it still is a good thing. Not to the extent that we rub dung in open wounds to make sure it develops. ---
**Author:** ![Sparky812](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Sparky812](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparky812)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/64 "2011-02-02T16:57:41Z")
> [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > Sparky812 writes: > > \> Please re-read your Classical world history, starting in Ancient Greece with pre- > \> Socratic beliefs and Aristotle’s writings. Then study Mesopotamian, Ancient > \> Egyptian, Chinese and Indian religions and come back when you have an more > \> educated viewpoint. > > No, you’re simply wrong here. Look at this Wikipedia article: > > [Spherical Earth - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth) > > Now look at what you said in your original post: > > \> Back in the day, the Earth was not only flat but the center of the Universe > \> around which the Sun and stars rotated. > \> To profess anything else was blasphemous and claimants were found to be > \> dead wrong, literally and figuratively speaking. > > I don’t know what you could mean when you claim that someone who insisted that the Earth was round would be considered blasphemous and would be executed except that you’re claiming that this is what happened during the Middle Ages in Europe. That’s blatantly false. Every educated person in Medieval Europe (which included all the hierarchy of the Catholic Church) believed that the Earth was round. They knew approximately how big it was. (In fact, Columbus understood the Earth’s size less well than anyone else in 1492. People told him that he could never reach Asia in a ship because it was too far to sail. They were right. If North and South America hadn’t been in the way, he and his men would have starved to death before he could have reached Asia. Columbus, perhaps deliberately, underestimated the size of the Earth to make it seem like he could sail to Asia.) They also knew approximately how big the moon was and how far away it was. Every educated person in Europe since 300 A.D. (which includes everyone of importance in the Catholic Church) has believed that the Earth was round. No one has ever been considered blasphemous and been executed by them for believing that the Earth was round. If you’re claiming that there was some ancient civilization somewhere where they believed that the Earth was flat and who considered people who believed that it was round were blasphemous and should be executed, what civilization was that? All this for a joke? It was a play on words from the original OP! Wow! What a killjoy! ---
**Author:** ![AshenLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/94ad74/32.png) [@AshenLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AshenLady)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/65 "2011-02-02T17:58:44Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Frankly, I don’t think that describing plate tectonics as a new and still somewhat tentative theory in a college course _back in 1975_ necessarily qualifies as a symptom of reactionary clinging to obsolete theories. Back in 1975, AFAICT, plate tectonics still **was** a relatively new and somewhat tentative theory that was not universally accepted among geology researchers, and previous models were not yet “obsolete” as far as mainstream science was concerned. > > You seem to be finding it hard to let go of your theory that your husband’s professors of thirty-five years ago must have been closed-minded old coots, simply because they didn’t know as much back then about the validity of the plate-tectonics model as we know about it today. Well, someone asked the question as to why his professors weren’t teaching the new plate tectonic theory and the only thing we could come up with is that the Professors were quite old and had a hard time accepting newer ideas that were in the process of being “fleshed out”. ---
**Author:** ![Gymnopithys](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/fbc32d/32.png) [@Gymnopithys](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gymnopithys)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/66 "2011-02-02T21:02:27Z")
> [@AshenLady](#): > > My husband went to a good college and was taught that plate tectonics was a new “theory” that had yet to be proven and was considered “newfangled” by the older professors, of course, who are now dead wrong, literally and figuratively speaking. > > What other scientific facts were found to be dead wrong, through time, when new information was discovered. Do you mean plate tectonics has been replaced by this: http://www.4threvolt.com/EEEvidence.html ? ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2011, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/67 "2011-02-02T21:50:09Z")
> [@WarmNPrickly](#): > > Old theories aren’t discarded just because they aren’t entirely right. Newtons laws are perfectly accurate for most things and are currently taught in highschool physics. Instantaneous light is just fine for everyday stuff, as is a geocentric earth. The old theories aren’t necessarily wrong, their just not great at describing more complicated behaviors. Agreed. It’s a common meme that the laws of motion have been proven wrong in the face of relativistic and quantum physics. In reality they are used to make thousands of correct predictions every day. All theories are simplifications at one level or another. The Newtonian model is cruder than some we have available, but they provide a useful simplification in many situations. For all the talk of “Once scientists believed X, now we know different” there aren’t many substitutions for X, certainly not where the actual scientific method was employed. The whole nature of the scientific method; where one must make repeatable, accurate, surprising predictions basically precludes being outright wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Wendell\_Wagner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/8491ac/32.png) [@Wendell\_Wagner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wendell_Wagner)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2011, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/68 "2011-02-03T04:03:31Z")
Sparky812 writes: \> All this for a joke? It was a play on words from the original OP! \> Wow! What a killjoy! Geez, you’re desperate. You make an incorrect statement and try hopelessly to defend it. When someone finally shows you that it can’t possibly be true, you then claim that it was just a joke. ---
**Author:** ![Sparky812](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Sparky812](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparky812)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2011, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653/69 "2011-02-03T04:43:36Z")
I have always maintained that it was a joke. Please reread post #46 > [@Sparky812](#): > > I was joking but… > [@Wendell\_Wagner](#): > > It’s been generally accepted since at least the time of the ancient Greeks that the Earth is round. I have no desire to debate with you, since you fail to to comprehend that this statement is the falsehood. Please move on. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scientific-facts/569653.md?page=3)