"Bill Hobba" wrote in message
...

"Max Keon" wrote in message
u...
"Max Keon" wrote in message
u...
Gravity Causes Light Speed Anisotropy.

What has changed since last you posted it?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...ty/browse_frm/
thread/35075edbe2f13ff7/697bac805a033ca3#697bac805a033ca3

Do you actually read anything you reply too?

I most certainly do.

If I post details of how I used my interferometer frame to wedge
a mallyroot out of the ground, would you still consider that a
re-post?

But that is not what you did. The apparatus was exactly the same as your
previous post.


Why not reply to the issues raised previously instead of posting
it again?

If you can't understand the reasoning, don't be expecting
to fill a role in the physics community.


You did not take the tack of actually addressing the issues of myself, Tom
and Eric. I wonder why. Of course evasion is straight out if how to be a
crank 101. I suspect your post is a project from 102 - applications of
the 101 course.


Some time back, young Eric confessed to holding himself.
Do you have an excuse too?


I have not gone blind yet - you obviously have.

Do you really think people like myself and Eric who have been dealing with
your type for years will be fooled by your silly evasiveness? Address the
issues raised by Tom, myself and Eric then repost eg I raised the issue
of clock syncing 'Just as there is no way out of avoiding syncing clocks
to measure OWLS and get meaningful results. Basically you can't do it.'

Bill

Just to elaborate further on the crank tactic being used here. Note the
beginning of the thread: 'The interferometer depicted below was the one I
used to demonstrate the existence of an east-west light speed anisotropy
around anything fixed to the earth's surface.'. The previous posts cast
severe doubt on his assertion. Yet what did Max Keon do? Simply stopped
responding to that thread and starts a new one a bit later that assumes what
the previous thread claimed was true despite the fact it was shown to have
serious problems the author never addressed. Then when those objections are
again highlighted by referencing the previous post simply ignore it and
claim - 'If I post details of how I used my interferometer frame to wedge a
mallyroot out of the ground, would you still consider that a re-post?' As I
said a project from crank 102.

Bill