Columbus analogy (Was: Corrections to trivia

From: John Ruschmeyer <jruschme_at_exit109.com>
Date: Sun Oct 11 18:00:27 1998

> > < So, is Columbus less important because the Vikings reached the Americas
> > < before him? Or is it only important that most of the lasting effects
> > < descend from Columbus?
>
> Columbus is a superb analogy for this thread! Not that the results
> necessarily match, but that MANY related issues are also present.
>
> Columbus is the "canonical" discoverer, in spite of the Vikings, or even
> the previously existing "colonists" who had been living there for a LONG
> time ever since coming over the Bering straits?
  
> Columbus did NOT tell the world that it wasn't flat. By the time of
> Columbus, that was well known and accepted by all educated people. The
> only ones who still thought that it was flat are now paying dollars per
> minute for telephone psychic readings. Although there were some fears of
> dangers, sailing off the edge was NOT taken seriously as a possibility by
> anybody with any education.

Looking at it another way, Columbus really did nothing to disprove the
flatness of the Earth. Ultimately, all he did was sail west until he hit
a piece of land that was not the easternmost land that he wanted to hit.
So, he did not prove the world was round (that would have to wait for
Magellan) nor did he fall off the edge. All he really did was find more
land to the west of Europe.

Definately overrated... :-)
<<<John>>>
Received on Sun Oct 11 1998 - 18:00:27 BST