Answer the question at the end by quoting:

David Kellogg Lewis (September 28, 1941 - October 14, 2001) was an American philosopher. Lewis taught briefly at UCLA and then at Princeton from 1970 until his death. He is also closely associated with Australia, whose philosophical community he visited almost annually for more than thirty years. He made contributions in philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, philosophy of probability, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophical logic, and aesthetics.
Lewis went on to publish Counterfactuals (1973), which contained an analysis of Counterfactual conditionals in terms of the theory of possible worlds. He had already proposed it in some of his earlier papers: "Counterpart Theory and Quantified Modal Logic" (1968), "Anselm and Actuality" (1970), and "Counterparts of Persons and their Bodies" (1971). In spite of significant technical advantages promised by this approach, the theory was widely considered to be too implausible to be taken literally, as Lewis urged it should be. Most often the idea that there exists an infinite number of causally isolated universes, each as real as our own but different from it in some way, and that furthermore that alluding to objects in this universe as necessary in order to explain what makes certain counterfactual statements true but not others, meets with what Lewis calls the "incredulous stare" (Lewis, OPW, 2005, pg. 135-137). Lewis defends and elaborates his theory of extreme modal realism, while insisting that there is nothing extreme about it, in On the Plurality of Worlds (1986). Lewis acknowledges that his theory is contrary to common sense, but believes that its advantages far outweigh this disadvantage, and that therefore we should not be hesitant to pay this price.  According to Lewis, what makes a counterfactual conditional of the form  "Had I made that shot our team would have won the game."  true is that there is a world, as concrete as ours and significantly similar to it, in which my counterpart makes rather than misses the shot and the counterpart of our team wins the game. Had there been a world even more similar to ours in which my counterpart makes the shot but the counterpart of our team still loses the counterfactual would have been false. When we speak of counterfactual possibilities we speak of what is the case in some possible world or worlds. According to Lewis, "actual" is merely an indexical label we give to a world when we locate ourselves in it. Things are necessarily true when they are true in all possible worlds. (Note that Lewis is not the first one to speak of possible worlds in this context. Leibniz and C.I. Lewis, for example, both speak of possible worlds as a way of thinking about possibility and necessity, and some of David Kaplan's early work is on the counterpart theory. Lewis's original suggestion was that all possible worlds are equally concrete, and the world in which we find ourselves is no more real than any other possible world.)

Did any other famous philosophers disagree with him?

In spite of significant technical advantages promised by this approach, the theory was widely considered to be too implausible to be taken literally,

IN: The Algonquins are indigenous inhabitants of North America who speak the Algonquin language, a divergent dialect of the Ojibwe language, which is part of the Algonquian language family. Culturally and linguistically, they are closely related to the Odawa and Ojibwe, with whom they form the larger Anicinape (Anishinaabe) grouping. The Algonquin people call themselves Omamiwinini (plural: Omamiwininiwak) or the more generalised name of Anicinape. Though known by several names in the past, the most common term "Algonquin" has been suggested to derive from the Maliseet word elakomkwik (IPA: [elae'gomogwik]): "they are our relatives/allies".

The Algonquin first met Europeans when Samuel de Champlain came upon a party led by the Kitcisipirini Chief Tessouat at Tadoussac, in eastern present-day Quebec, in the summer of 1603. They were celebrating a recent victory over the Iroquois, with the allied Montagnais and Etechemins (Malecite). Champlain did not understand that the Algonquins were socially united by a strong totem/clan system rather than the European-styled political concept of nationhood. The several Algonquin bands each had its own chief. Within each band, the chief depended on political approval from each of the band's clan leaders. Champlain needed to cultivate relationships with numerous chiefs and clan leaders. From 1603, some of the Algonquin allied with the French under Champlain. This alliance proved useful to the Algonquin, who previously had little to no access to European firearms.  Champlain made his first exploration of the Ottawa River during May 1613 and reached the fortified Kitcisipirini village at Morrison Island. Unlike the other Algonquin communities, the Kitcisipiriniwak did not change location with the seasons. They had chosen a strategic point astride the trade route between the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence River. They prospered through the collection of beaver pelts from native traders passing through their territory. They also were proud of their corn fields.  At first, the French used the term "Algonquin" only for a second group, the Wawackeciriniwak. However, by 1615, they applied the name to all of the Algonquin bands living along the Ottawa River. Because of keen interest by tribes to gain control of the lower Ottawa River, the Kitcisipiriniwak and the Wawackeciriniwak came under fierce opposition. These two large groups allied together, under the leadership of Sachem Charles Parcharini, to maintain the Omamiwinini identity and territory.

When did the French contact the Algonquins?

OUT:
in the summer of 1603.