Barney & Clyde by Gene Weingarten; Dan Weingarten & David Clark for August 01, 2021

Freud hasn’t been discredited. Actually neuroscience has confirmed a lot of it.

One major reason science should be taught is that it works to recognize when it’s been wrong and to correct its mistakes.

Another is so that those who are taught actual science can recognize when others are lying to us about what science has actually discovered.

in old age freud always thought, ah, to be jung again…

If only the cartoonist had one more panel available, he could’ve added the “science” of climate change to his list.

I wonder how far retro-phrenology could have gone… :-D

Throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Now anti vaccine people will find some grounds they’ll spout.

And the fact that absolutely everyone agrees 100% about religion is proof that it’s correct. And that religious views have never changed ever throughout history just seals the deal.

I’m reminded of a Bugs Bunny cartoon, where he pretends to be a doctor, and tells the patient, “First, we have to read the bumps on your head.”

“But I don’t have any bumps on my head.”

“Oh, well, in that case . . . "

I leave it to the assembled masses to figure out what Bugs did next.

How about the two Italians who set out to measure the speed of light by firing a canon at the same time they uncovered the lantern then seeing how long after the sound arrived the light arrived. Instead they measured the speed of sound but didn’t know it. You gotta start somewhere.

I was thinking just last night about the canals on Mars. I don’t know whether that “discovery” ever made it into textbooks, but it was widely believed and I’d be willing to bet there are people alive today who believe they exist. Of course, that one was destined to pass away as better telescopes were invented, and it makes me wonder what other discoveries/theories will be erased simply by better observations…

Wow, both of them are incredibly wrong. Not a single one of those subjects mentioned were scientific theories. For something to be a scientific theory, there must exist a lot of actual evidence that the theory is true. No solid evidence, no theory. The evidence shows that the guy in the strip is not a scientist (and neither is the author).

Well — the phlogiston theory was wrong but it was a major step forward from the “four elements” theory and was the basis for the discovery of the elements. And one of the reasons the Geocentric theory survived so long was because when everyone was thinking in terms of circular orbits it fitted the facts better than Copernicus’s Heliocentric theory. It wasn’t until Kepler came up with eliptical orbits that the Heliocentric theory was accepted. And when you didn’t have a microscope, spontaneous generation seemed much more feasible.

Any resemblance between Mr. Feinstein (https://www.gocomics.com/barneyandclyde/2011/09/13) and a certain co-creator of a certain comic strip is purely coincidental. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/AN3HUGVUDYI6XK2DX265YWQPMU.jpg&w=916

Facts are that it is real only a small group dependent on fossil fuels have said otherwise and their fan boys. In fact one of them, Exxon started it in the 1970’s to counter science on it to maintain its making billions off of fossil fuel. They knew it was real then but they wanted riches so they created a counter movement to slow it down. They owned up to it abouy 5 years ago.

Science has a longer history than the word.

My list of most disproven:

o Theory of Forms

o Non-corporeal Actions

o The idea of multiple homo sapiens races

o Moral component of natural entities

Have phlogiston and caloric been replaced by dark matter and dark energy?