Re: RC: Reply from an educated derelict

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 12/27/99 4:28:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, CMKSAGEHIL 
writes:

<< << Yes, but the need exists, nonetheless. It seems to me that you have the 
choice to snooze along until some grand poohbah makes an announcement, that 
is sure to be proven half wrong in another decade, or you can start trying 
thengs and if you find something that works, you pass on the information. >>
 
 Generally, it's those questions asked in the field that stimulate the 
research, not the other way aroound. >

Convenient, if you're seeking funds for research and can't think of a 
question to ask. But, really, most questions are asked, and answered in the 
field. That's the way it has always happened in athletics. At one point, 
poobahs said that the 4:00 mile would burst a human's heart. Then Bannister, 
using his own training methods, did it, and dozens, using even better 
training methods, followed. Researchers followed along behind, picking up the 
pieces of their shattered theories. 

 >It's been interesting in the quarter century that I've been doing this how 
often we've observed some phenomenon in "real life" and have wondered about 
the science behind it, and then in a few years, the science gives us reasons 
for what we've seen--not always the reasons we thought they'd be, either!
 
 Heidi >>

Yes, that's the pattern. Especially with things that have never been done 
before. In real life, the "whys" matter less than the "hows".  

ti


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=