Ouch, my bad. There are differing views on misconceptions. Some view them as no big deal: create 'em now, maybe clean them up later. Incremental lying and cla

Ouch, my bad. There are differing views on misconceptions. Some view them as no big deal: create 'em now, maybe clean them up later. Incremental lying and clarification. Another is that they're more problematic: hard to undo, creating thought "friction" that discourages knowledge integration and application, and more. My own atypical view, is that they are extremely toxic mutagenic agents of corrupting cognitive death. ;) In part because the corruption spreads. Have one bogus bit of story, try to reconcile it with valid bits, and soon one has a creative flurry of additional bogus stories attempting to patch them together. Recurse. I once saw an introduction to the solar system page, with a big graphic at the top. It was a work of art. It reinforced so many common misconceptions about the solar system. My thought then was, there's no way the rest of this page can dig out from the hole of damage done by this first graphic. Net-negative learning. In general, it seems so very easy for content to cause severe collateral damage. I use a remark like "from space" or "outside the atmosphere", to prune a conversation space. But it does reinforce the idea, to the best of my knowledge incorrect, that seen from the surface, the Sun is not often white. Sorry. I'll have to think about how to mitigate that. Thanks.