There's something to say about not sticking too closely with old theories originally developed on empirical evidence of the day. They were good when they were developed, but with newer, more precise and more powerful technologies, one just can't turn a blind eye to the quantitative evidence they reveal, eh ?
I mean Arp's Instrinsic Redshift theories fall into the same bucket, also, as does the Big Bang/Standard Cosmology model, supported by CMBR, the brilliant concept of 'Darkness' and Inflation,
, etc, etc.
Imagine where the world would be if we ignored the development of computers !
Having said this, Newton, Einstein and a few others, have still stood the test of time and stand supported by modern evidence.
Few and far between were these guys, though.
Also highlights the folly of thinking that the 'Ancients' knew more than we know today ! How often is this a deliberate dogma of developing pseudosciences, eh ?
Interesting.
Cheers
PS: For the record .. the link Steven posted the other day on reconnection being shown in the lab is:
http://mrx.pppl.gov/ … thanks, Steven !