Prev: Energy weight of singularity
Next: New Generation Lossless Data Representations
From: Helmut Wabnig hwabnig on 12 Aug 2010 02:38
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 21:39:40 -0700 (PDT), Jim Black
<tramspap(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

>Conservapedia has joined the anti-relativity movement. They could use
>some help from some of the resident anti-relativity "experts" here.
>Do you have a disproof of relativity? Add it to the list:
>
>http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity


From above site:
cit
28.In Genesis 1:6-8, we are told that one of God's first creations was
a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the
luminiferous aether.
end cit.


What a wonderful example of a counterexample.

w.
From: eric gisse on 12 Aug 2010 05:20
Jim Black wrote:

> Conservapedia has joined the anti-relativity movement. They could use
> some help from some of the resident anti-relativity "experts" here.
> Do you have a disproof of relativity? Add it to the list:
>
> http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity
>
> --
> Jim E. Black

I spent way too much time thinking of a response to this. The best I've come
up with is this:

Reality has a liberal bias.


From: eric gisse on 12 Aug 2010 05:27
Inertial wrote:

> "Jim Black" wrote in message
> news:cae87924-d235-4bcf-8ab2-a61987b3a314(a)v6g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>Conservapedia has joined the anti-relativity movement. They could use
>>some help from some of the resident anti-relativity "experts" here.
>>Do you have a disproof of relativity? Add it to the list:
>>
>>http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity
>
> They ARE godbot morons at that site, you realise.
>
> Don't you love that Jesus performing miracles 'at a distance' is cited as
> a
> counter example to relativity? And that genesis talking about a firmament
> is proof that there is really an aether, and so LET is correct.
>
> Of course, none of their counter examples are valid
>
> The pioneer and flyby anomalies don't refute relativity .. they are simply
> not explained solely by relativity. The presence of other factors doesn't
> refute relativity
>
> The authors (or whomever they cite) just don't understand 'relativistic'
> mass, and that zero rest mass does not mean zero momentum for light. That
> relativity predicts what is measured is NOT a counter example, nor is the
> site author's inability to understand what is predicted and observed.
>
> Claims that relativity doesn't result in other 'insights' (apart from
> being
> wrong) and yields no useful devices is not a counter example. Whether it
> does or not has no bearing on whether it is an accurate model. They then
> go on to claim that atomic bombs *were* produced using the theory .. which
> shows that the theory is correct, not incorrect. They don't even know
> what a counter-example is !!!
>
> Also note that the page
> http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Bible says there are no
> counter examples to the bible.
>
> What a joke.

I wanted to say something along the lines of "don't get vaccinated,
scientists make those too" then I realized that there are already people
with that mindset. At least their stupidity is punished.

From: Igor on 12 Aug 2010 10:15
On Aug 12, 1:46 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 11, 9:56 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_z> wrote:
>
> > "Jim Black" <trams...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:cae87924-d235-4bcf-8ab2-a61987b3a314(a)v6g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> > | Conservapedia has joined the anti-relativity movement.  They could use
> > | some help from some of the resident anti-relativity "experts" here.
> > | Do you have a disproof of relativity?  Add it to the list:
> > |
> > |http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity
> > |
> > | --
> > | Jim E. Black
>
> > Another pro-aether jesus freak.
> > The resident pro-relativity "bigots" here should be happy they have
> > aetherialist bigots to argue with.
>
> If a relativist runner runs a race and wins can he say the ground did
> it?
>
> Mitch Raemsch

No, he'll say the butler did it.

From: harald on 13 Aug 2010 10:35
On Aug 12, 6:39 am, Jim Black <trams...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> Conservapedia has joined the anti-relativity movement.  They could use
> some help from some of the resident anti-relativity "experts" here.
> Do you have a disproof of relativity?  Add it to the list:
>
> http://www.conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity
>
> --
> Jim E. Black

This one is a gem:

"In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most
physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory
of general relativity was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed
precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however,
more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this
precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of
only 0.01), and leading promoters of relativity (such as Professor
Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming
relativity."
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Energy weight of singularity
Next: New Generation Lossless Data Representations