What the "Marlowe=Shakespeare Theory" has in common with the "Continental Drift Theory" of WEGENER?
"If you are to believe in the Marlowe = Shakespeare authorship hypothesis you must forget [almost] everything which has been learned in the past 200 years and start all over again".
Alfred Wegener's theory of the wandering continents ("continental drift") proposed 1912 for the first time ...
contradicted all the facts considered to be confirmed scientifically in the earth sciences. He caused a huge scandal.
The reaction in scientific circles are reminiscent in many ways to the outrage in publications of unorthodox arguments of the Shakespeare Authorship debate.
The reaction in scientific circles are reminiscent in many ways to the outrage in publications of unorthodox arguments of the Shakespeare Authorship debate.
Wegener was shaking existing dogmas. He met with widespread rejection, for more than half a century, and brought biting sarcasm and insults upon himself. The majority of fellow scientists refused to accept Wegener's theory and called them ideas of an " incompetent lateral entrant " (Wegener was a geophysicist and meteorologist ). The president of the American Philosophical Society Rollin Thomas Chamberlin, geologist of the University of Chicago , concluded :
Wegener's theory of continental drift has long since become a self-evident truth. Today we can not imagine that his thesis once encountered such a resolute rejection so long. Why does the scientific world fought so vehemently against plausible explanations? None of the old explanation had managed to explain the ever-new questions and insights satisfactory. Only with new observations and research results could change it gradually .
A similar situation is true of the Shakespeare authorship situation and the "identity dogma " [ Shakspere = Shakespeare
"If we are to believe in Wegener 's hypothesis we must forget everything which has been been learned in the past 70 years and start all over again . "
Wegener's theory of continental drift has long since become a self-evident truth. Today we can not imagine that his thesis once encountered such a resolute rejection so long. Why does the scientific world fought so vehemently against plausible explanations? None of the old explanation had managed to explain the ever-new questions and insights satisfactory. Only with new observations and research results could change it gradually .
A similar situation is true of the Shakespeare authorship situation and the "identity dogma " [ Shakspere = Shakespeare
