Newton was notoriuously confident about his mechanics, making ridiculously accurate "predictions" that could not have possibly been correct. Citing Glashow,
...Not the least part of the Principia’s persuasiveness was its deliberate pretense to a degree of precision quite beyond its legitimate claim. If the Principia established the quantitative pattern of modern science, it equally suggested a less sublime truth: that no one can manipulate the fudge factor
quite so effectively as the master mathematician himself. In 1713, he found the ratio of the masses of the earth and moon to be 39.371, whereas its actual value is about 81. Here Newton asserts five decimal place precision for a result that is wrong by over a factor of two! Even more astonishing was Newton’s claim that the moon, if its orbital motion were stopped by some magical agency, would fall toward earth a distance of 14.7706353 feet in one minute: nine significant figures, of which only the first two are correct! As Westfall writes, “Newton doctored still another computation in his effort to create an illusion of great accuracy.”
http://www.iec.cat/butlleti/pdf/90_butlleti_sheldon.pdfThe moon followed a life long pattern. Newton even calculated the date for the end of the world with an accuracy of a month. Did he do it to scheme into the wardenship of the Royal Mint? That's laughable.
Our climatologists also make ridiculously confident predictions that can be correct only by coincidence, as they lack knowledge required to make such predictions, if that's possible at all. [Incidentally, many of them give the same date for the Armageddon as Newton (about 2060 AD), but that's beside the point.] Some people say that they are doing it because they are corrupt, but this is like telling that Newton did it in order to become the ward of the Mint. This is seldom if ever true. Personally, I've never met such gold diggers.
So people tell about scientific integrity, etc. Wrong. This is not a matter of integrity. One cannot realistically expect scientists to be holier than Newton. Show me a great man of integrity that never made a blunder.
One makes such blunders when one dares. As a chemist, I can be certain that properties of molecules CAN be explained. It is only a matter of making correct approximations, and these can be rectified. I do not need to claim that my calculations are correct to nine digital places. No one will find that persuasive; nay, it would look suspicious, given the many approximations involved; nor is such precision important. The foundations are solid, my work cannot shake them, so every error is my own fault. I am given a lego, I can play with it as creatively as I can, but I did not make the lego pieces myself.
Not so in physics of 1700 or climatology of 2012. To embark on a year-long calculation one has to have great faith in one's starting premises - or find another occupation. I derive my faith from someone else's rock solid results, all of which at some point were sheer arrogance. I can do that, but they can't; they need to be arrogant themselves. Only people with unshakeable faith in their questionable premises will bet decades of their own life on doing such calculations.
Much as I dislike the result, I am not in their shoes to judge them. It takes all kinds.
Боюсь я не доживу))) да и вы тоже
