Talk:Richard Holmes (biographer)
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
What Radical Vision of Science? edit
Re: "Holmes proposes a radical vision of science before Charles Darwin, exploring the earliest ideas of deep time and deep space...'":
Apparently the "deep time and deep space" just means since it takes light time to travel through space, looking at stars in the sky is in a sense looking at the past. There is no elementary pop astronomy book that doesn't mention this; it's utterly humdrum and conventional. I haven't the slightest the slightest idea what "radical vision of science" Holmes "proposes" here--unless it's the silly self-aggrandizing bit in the epilogue in which he says "we need...a more enlarged and imaginative biographical writing about individual scientists". I'd say we need this about as much as we need People magazine. In any case, the biographical writing within this particular novel is also utterly conventional. Let's report, not promote--and especially let's not promote with bullshit. TheScotch (talk) 09:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)