I sympathize strongly with your comment. But, following your own standards, there should be a little voice of doubt in your mind about this narrative as well.
Perhaps it seems that civilizations grow more corrupt over time merely because their ability to detect and disseminate knowledge of such corruption improves.
> But, following your own standards, there should be a little voice of doubt in your mind about this narrative as well.
That was written before Tesla's response. You're saying, that for the interest on impartiality, I should have doubted Tesla's side before I even read it? Huh?!? Does that make sense?
As I stated elsewhere, someone can replicate both Tesla's side and Broder's side by redoing the trip both ways.
That, in itself, highlights the crucial difference between an anecdote and data. Journalists as a general rule over-emphasize an anecdotal view of the world at the expense of an evidence-based view.
