If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling "nothing but the truth", but leaving out important context.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling "nothing but the truth", but leaving out important context.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling "nothing but the truth", but leaving out important context.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling "nothing but the truth", but leaving out important context.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Later in time down that same path, we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling "nothing but the truth", but leaving out important context.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Later in time down that same path, we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

You can also tell a lie by telling the truth.

A lie is an intent to mislead. It really has nothing to do with the veracity of the statement itself.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Later in time down that same path, we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You can only tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. Harm was obviously done by a non-truth, but we don't call Aristotle a liar because we can't prove intent to mislead.

Later in time down that same path, we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You can only tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. Who knows how much scientific damage that non-truth caused, keeping us from gaining a deeper understanding of physics for two millennia. He had evidence and logic that supported it.

Similarly we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You can only tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

Intent is everything.

Nothing could be further from the truth, which if that statement is true, suggests your statement was a non-truth. Does that make it a lie?

If I say the Sun goes around the Earth, and I have math equations, path evidence, and experiential evidence and logic that supports that statement, does that make it true? Such a statement, when originally made by Aristotle had good evidence, and good investigation that showed the Sun going around the Earth. Later evidence and data suggest that theory was not true.

We don't call Aristotle a liar because he put forth the original non-truth. He had evidence and logic that supported it. Similarly we don't call Newton a liar because he put forth his view of gravity that turned out to be very wrong when you look closely enough. Hell, his theories were right enough that they are still the most cited theories of gravity, even though they clearly don't fit the data and can't be used in many of the more important engineering and physics problems we solve today (in space).

Saying something that is not true is not a lie if you believe it. You can only tell a lie if you say a non-truth and you know it.

Intent is everything.