On Apr 21, 6:51*pm, none ""doug\"@(none)" wrote:
NoEinstein wrote:
On Apr 20, 10:09 pm, Huang wrote:
On Apr 20, 8:09 pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Apr 19, 12:09 am, Huang wrote:
Light can be a wave or a particle, but not both at the same time.
This is because physical length can be either continuous or discrete,
but not both at the same time.
And this is because a random length may be regarded as being
indeterminately continuous or discrete.
And to understand this you must understand existential indeterminacy.
That points may be regarded as being existentially indeterminate, but
there is another equally valid approach which does NOT consider points
to be existentially indeterminate, and that BOTH cases are equally
valid.
You should now know exactly what a photon is, what gravity is, dark
matter, and everything else.
Dear Huang: *You just quote Einstein. *But I've disproved that man up,
down, and sideways! *Light is PHOTONS only, NOT a wave... EVER!
Please go to my profile and read my recent posts. *Then, you should
agree to forget his moronic ideas. *— NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I wish Einstein were here to kick your ass properly, and in person.

If light did'nt behave like a wave then they would'nt be calling it a
wave-prticle duality. It would be the "particle singularity" hah hah.

Dear Huang: *I'll get the last laugh! *Since I've disproved Einstein's
theories of relativity, and etc., nothing that "they" say is worth a
damn.
Light can be either wave or particle because just like gravity, it is
composed only of space. Gravity is nothing more than a deformation of
space. Why should photons be any different?

Einstein's moronic "space-time" ideas resulted from Lorentz's lame
brain attempt to explain the nil result of the 1887 Michelson-Morley
experiment. *Since all of the optics were rotated in the same PLANE
(horizontal), the supposed TIME change in one light course was always
exactly the same as for the other light course. *Because I discovered
the simple fact that the M-M experiment was designed without an
unchanging CONTROL, there was no need to change the... rulers and
clocks to *******ize science to suit Einstein's whim.

My own X-Y-Z interferometer easily detects Earth's movement in the
cosmos. *Einstein himself said that no Earth based experiment could
detect such movement, but he was so WRONG! *— NoEinstein —
[Snip remaining dribble...]

If your interferometer was as well done as your impact experiment,
you can not say anything about the results. *You and Seto have this
fascination with not liking things done in the horizontal plane
when, in an experiment done over a period of time, there is no
difference between that and a vertical plane since the earth
revolves (or maybe you have disproved that as well).
By the way, Einstein and all his predictions are still doing quite
well. I keep checking to see if GPS has stopped but it apparently
does not know about your "disproofs".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

:-} - -

On Apr 21, 9:08*pm, PD wrote:
On Apr 21, 5:44*pm, NoEinstein wrote:





On Apr 21, 7:55*am, "Paul Mays" wrote:

--http://fast.filespace.org/PaulRMays/Postulate.pdf

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

"NoEinstein" wrote in message

....
On Apr 19, 4:51 am, "Paul Mays" wrote:

"Paul Mays" wrote in message

.. .

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 12:52 pm, "Paul Mays" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

On Apr 18, 11:19 am, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a
wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic
Field?
How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know
whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php

Perhaps you'll become the first to know the answer, because
Einstein
didn't have a clue.

I might care to rethink of those photons we see and of all those
photons we can't see as simply slow moving gravitons, or perhaps
as
somewhat quantum string like items. Of course, this still doesn't
tell us specifically as to "what is light".

Is there even any such thing as an original photon, or is each and
every available photon merely a secondary/recoil result of
gravitons
interacting with other gravitons, or of gravitons interacting with
mass?

Pure energy seems to create photons, but without available
gravitons
it doesn't hardly matter, does it.
. - Brad Guth

I gota definition I like too...

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

I like your interpretation as much as that one provided by '"dlzc".

However, if gravity/gravitons didn't exist, neither would the quantum
string like photon. In other words, without the spin of atoms, we got
nothing.
. - Brad Guth

Well my interpretation Explains why there no need for gravitons to
denote the Causation of Gravity, What specifically light is and why its
detectable as a Wave or Little ball of stuff (Photon), Why its velocity
will always be independent of source or target, and seemingly a constant..

Yet allows all existing physical rules to remain valid to a Intrinsically
Biased
observer.

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: *You're right on all but one point: "The velocity of
emitted (or reflected) light ALWAYS increases or decreases depending
on the velocity and direction of the source or reflecting surface." *—
NoEinstein —

No .. *A car is going 50mph at a brick wall... *if the wall is moving at the
car
at 50 mpg yes the impact comes sooner and with more force but the car
is still doing 50mph..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: Closing velocity is confusing you. *Think of a baseball
pitcher on the bow of a boat. *If the boat is going 10 mph, and he
throws a 90 mph fast ball (relative to the boat) in the direction the
boat is headed, the baseball will be increased in speed to 100 mph.

Not quite. The baseball will be going (90 mph + 10 mph)/(1 + (90 mph)
(10 mph)/c^2).

But if the same pitcher throws the ball 90 mph from the stern, the
ball will only be traveling 80 mph relative to the shore.

Again not quite. Take the same formula above and replace the plus
signs with minus signs.

*Light does
EXACTLY the same thing! *— NoEinstein —

Yes, you're right. So let's take a boat going 10 mph and throw light
from it, so that the speed is (10 mph + c)/(1 + (10 mph)*c/c^2).
Please do the itty bitty bit of algebra and tell me what answer you
get. Is it more than c, less than c, or the same as c?

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

:-} ~

On Apr 21, 9:08*pm, PD wrote:
On Apr 21, 5:45*pm, NoEinstein wrote:





On Apr 21, 8:28*am, PD wrote:

On Apr 20, 8:30*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Apr 19, 4:51*am, "Paul Mays" wrote:

"Paul Mays" wrote in message

.. .

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On Apr 18, 12:52 pm, "Paul Mays" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

On Apr 18, 11:19 am, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a
wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic Field?
How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know
whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion..php

Perhaps you'll become the first to know the answer, because Einstein
didn't have a clue.

I might care to rethink of those photons we see and of all those
photons we can't see as simply slow moving gravitons, or perhaps as
somewhat quantum string like items. *Of course, this still doesn't
tell us specifically as to "what is light".

Is there even any such thing as an original photon, or is each and
every available photon merely a secondary/recoil result of gravitons
interacting with other gravitons, or of gravitons interacting with
mass?

Pure energy seems to create photons, but without available gravitons
it doesn't hardly matter, does it.
*. - Brad Guth

I gota definition I like too...

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

I like your interpretation as much as that one provided by '"dlzc".

However, if gravity/gravitons didn't exist, neither would the quantum
string like photon. *In other words, without the spin of atoms, we got
nothing.
. - Brad Guth

Well my interpretation Explains why there no need for gravitons to
denote the Causation of Gravity, What specifically light is and why its
detectable as a Wave or Little ball of stuff (Photon), Why its velocity
will always be independent of source or target, *and seemingly a constant..

Yet allows all existing physical rules to remain valid to a Intrinsically
Biased
observer.

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: *You're right on all but one point: "The velocity of
emitted (or reflected) light ALWAYS increases or decreases depending
on the velocity and direction of the source or reflecting surface." *—
NoEinstein —

This is counter to experimental measurement, NoEinstein. Of course,
you could always say that you don't care.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

* * *:-} -

Does that mean you don't care what experiment says?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

:-} ~~~

On Apr 21, 9:12*pm, PD wrote:
On Apr 21, 5:46*pm, NoEinstein wrote:





On Apr 21, 8:29*am, PD wrote:

On Apr 20, 8:26*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Apr 19, 4:14*am, "Paul Mays" wrote:

"BradGuth" wrote in message

... On Apr 18, 12:52 pm, "Paul Mays" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

...

On Apr 18, 11:19 am, Sanny wrote:
When in School I learnt 2 things about Light

1. Light is a Wave

I was shown Lenses and other Experiments to proove Light is a wave.

2. When I grew up I was told Light is Electro Magnetic Wave.

Later I was Told
3. Magnetic and Electric Field in a light travel at 90`

Can we Change the angle of movement of Electric & Magnetic Field?
How
can we say they are perpendicular.

Later I was told Light has photons and its energy is = h*u

So light is a Particle moving at light Speed.

Then I was told Light is both Particle and Wave

Dont you feel things are getting Complex and Absurd.

After 12 years of my passing out of school I still want to know
whats
the correct description of light.

Bye
Sanny

Extreme Discussions at:http://www.getclub.com/Discussion.php

Perhaps you'll become the first to know the answer, because Einstein
didn't have a clue.

I might care to rethink of those photons we see and of all those
photons we can't see as simply slow moving gravitons, or perhaps as
somewhat quantum string like items. *Of course, this still doesn't
tell us specifically as to "what is light".

Is there even any such thing as an original photon, or is each and
every available photon merely a secondary/recoil result of gravitons
interacting with other gravitons, or of gravitons interacting with
mass?

Pure energy seems to create photons, but without available gravitons
it doesn't hardly matter, does it.
*. - Brad Guth

I gota definition I like too...

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"

I like your interpretation as much as that one provided by '"dlzc".

However, if gravity/gravitons didn't exist, neither would the quantum
string like photon. *In other words, without the spin of atoms, we got
nothing.
. - Brad Guth

Depends on whos Bias you follow..

--
Paul R. Mays
"I Believe in Nothing, I Know, I think I Know or I Do Not Know
*I Never Believe... For to Believe is a Religious Incantation"- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Paul: *"Believing" is the anti-science. *KNOWING is the true
science! *— NoEinstein —

KNOWING is religious faith, NoEinstein. Do you know the difference
between a scientist and a priest?

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

* :-} -

We seem to be getting someplace, NoEinstein. At first, I got a
detailed response. Then I got an elaborate "PD is a persona non grata
because....". Then I got, "Folks, ignore PD because he's a persona non
grata and you should ignore him." Then I got, "PD is a PNG." Then I
got, "PD = PNG". Now I get " :-}- "

You're gradually catching on. Pretty soon you won't be conversing at
all. You'll just be posting into the void and not answering responses
at all. You'll become as useful as Archimedes Plutonium and
EinsteinHoax, and just as ignored.

PD- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

!!! :-] - ~

On Apr 21, 9:22*pm, Huang wrote:
On Apr 21, 5:18*pm, NoEinstein wrote:





On Apr 20, 10:09*pm, Huang wrote:

On Apr 20, 8:09*pm, NoEinstein wrote:

On Apr 19, 12:09*am, Huang wrote:

Light can be a wave or a particle, but not both at the same time.

This is because physical length can be either continuous or discrete,
but not both at the same time.

And this is because a random length may be regarded as being
indeterminately continuous or discrete.

And to understand this you must understand existential indeterminacy.
That points may be regarded as being existentially indeterminate, but
there is another equally valid approach which does NOT consider points
to be existentially indeterminate, and that BOTH cases are equally
valid.

You should now know exactly what a photon is, what gravity is, dark
matter, and everything else.

Dear Huang: *You just quote Einstein. *But I've disproved that man up,
down, and sideways! *Light is PHOTONS only, NOT a wave... EVER!
Please go to my profile and read my recent posts. *Then, you should
agree to forget his moronic ideas. *— NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I wish Einstein were here to kick your ass properly, and in person.

If light did'nt behave like a wave then they would'nt be calling it a
wave-prticle duality. It would be the "particle singularity" hah hah.

Dear Huang: *I'll get the last laugh! *Since I've disproved Einstein's
theories of relativity, and etc., nothing that "they" say is worth a
damn.

Light can be either wave or particle because just like gravity, it is
composed only of space. Gravity is nothing more than a deformation of
space. Why should photons be any different?

Einstein's moronic "space-time" ideas resulted from Lorentz's lame
brain attempt to explain the nil result of the 1887 Michelson-Morley
experiment. *Since all of the optics were rotated in the same PLANE
(horizontal), the supposed TIME change in one light course was always
exactly the same as for the other light course. *Because I discovered
the simple fact that the M-M experiment was designed without an
unchanging CONTROL, there was no need to change the... rulers and
clocks to *******ize science to suit Einstein's whim.

My own X-Y-Z interferometer easily detects Earth's movement in the
cosmos. *Einstein himself said that no Earth based experiment could
detect such movement, but he was so WRONG! *— NoEinstein —

[Snip remaining dribble...]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Congradulations. That is the MOST RIDICULOUS thing that I have EVER
heard.

If only there were a prize befitting of the achievement, some thing
like a softened icecream cone placed upside down on top of your
head.... to be worn like a party hat.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Huang: Since you are a stupid, obnoxious pest, I'm promoting you
to a persona no grata! — NoEinstein —

------======== AHAHAHA... ahaha.... AHAHAHA ==========
"Tom Potter" wrote on Hitler's Birthday
in message ... or
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/msg/383de2ed2f7be3b1
something that has eerie undertones of similarity between 9/11
and the Kristallnacht. It shows troubling analogs between the
Weimar Republic and the recent and current State of the USA.

Let's hope that Potter's analysis turns out to be wrong and that
history will not necessarily repeat itself. But given the responses
that Potter receives from the blinded & brainwashed gyoim in
these NGs.... the prospects that the US goyim does unwittingly
create a self-fulfilling prophesy in analog to the history and fate
of "Potter's most moral, intelligent and productive people the
world has ever known", that possilibility can not be so easily
discarded...

Myself, I give a **** about the outcome since I make a great
living no matter who or what is in charge. I have always done so
in any culture I have worked with. You gotta accept that in any
tribe you do find some 90+% decent people & 2-3% of fanatical
assholes. The 2-3% you regard as such do think that you are the
same... Long-term peace is just not the cards, Potter... ahahaha.
With that, Tom... as usual, thanks for the laughs... ahaha...
ahahaha.... ahahanson

NoEinstein wrote:
On Apr 21, 6:51 pm, none ""doug\"@(none)" wrote:
NoEinstein wrote:
On Apr 20, 10:09 pm, Huang wrote:
On Apr 20, 8:09 pm, NoEinstein wrote:
On Apr 19, 12:09 am, Huang wrote:
Light can be a wave or a particle, but not both at the same time.
This is because physical length can be either continuous or discrete,
but not both at the same time.
And this is because a random length may be regarded as being
indeterminately continuous or discrete.
And to understand this you must understand existential indeterminacy.
That points may be regarded as being existentially indeterminate, but
there is another equally valid approach which does NOT consider points
to be existentially indeterminate, and that BOTH cases are equally
valid.
You should now know exactly what a photon is, what gravity is, dark
matter, and everything else.
Dear Huang: You just quote Einstein. But I've disproved that man up,
down, and sideways! Light is PHOTONS only, NOT a wave... EVER!
Please go to my profile and read my recent posts. Then, you should
agree to forget his moronic ideas. — NoEinstein —- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I wish Einstein were here to kick your ass properly, and in person.
If light did'nt behave like a wave then they would'nt be calling it a
wave-prticle duality. It would be the "particle singularity" hah hah.
Dear Huang: I'll get the last laugh! Since I've disproved Einstein's
theories of relativity, and etc., nothing that "they" say is worth a
damn.
Light can be either wave or particle because just like gravity, it is
composed only of space. Gravity is nothing more than a deformation of
space. Why should photons be any different?
Einstein's moronic "space-time" ideas resulted from Lorentz's lame
brain attempt to explain the nil result of the 1887 Michelson-Morley
experiment. Since all of the optics were rotated in the same PLANE
(horizontal), the supposed TIME change in one light course was always
exactly the same as for the other light course. Because I discovered
the simple fact that the M-M experiment was designed without an
unchanging CONTROL, there was no need to change the... rulers and
clocks to *******ize science to suit Einstein's whim.
My own X-Y-Z interferometer easily detects Earth's movement in the
cosmos. Einstein himself said that no Earth based experiment could
detect such movement, but he was so WRONG! — NoEinstein —
[Snip remaining dribble...]
If your interferometer was as well done as your impact experiment,
you can not say anything about the results. You and Seto have this
fascination with not liking things done in the horizontal plane
when, in an experiment done over a period of time, there is no
difference between that and a vertical plane since the earth
revolves (or maybe you have disproved that as well).
By the way, Einstein and all his predictions are still doing quite
well. I keep checking to see if GPS has stopped but it apparently
does not know about your "disproofs".- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

:-} - -
Thanks for admitting you are wrong. We all have known that but it is
good you are admitting it.

On Apr 21, 9:51*pm, Eric Gisse wrote:
On Apr 21, 2:18*pm, NoEinstein wrote:
[snip]



My own X-Y-Z interferometer easily detects Earth's movement in the
cosmos. *Einstein himself said that no Earth based experiment could
detect such movement, but he was so WRONG! *— NoEinstein —

Really?

That'd be worth a Nobel - why do you keep it to yourself?





[Snip remaining dribble...]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Eric: Have you gotten "religion" or something? You've made
three non-offensive comments in a row. Keep that up and I will remove
your PNG status!
To answer your question: My simple experiment has been described
in numerous of my replies. One guy, Tom Davidson, even asked for, and
got a drawing and a detailed description of the construction. I will
avoid any "PD like" groupies who only want to pass judgment—when they
have zero qualifications to p... on anything. If you will search my
profile for: X-Y-Z interferometer, one or more of those will describe
the arrangement of the laser, mirrors and target, etc. But to
understand what is happening all that is needed is to realize that
while the light (of either light course) is in transit, the apparatus
itself keeps moving due to Earth's velocity component. My
interferometer places the CONTROL light course on the SAME Z axis that
the rest of the apparatus rotates about. The beam splitter is
perpendicular to the first leg of the laser light. Since the TIME
required for light to travel to a PERPENDICULAR surface doesn't vary,
even though the mirror is moving, such can act as a CONTROL (something
that doesn't vary, to which something that DOES vary can be compared).
After passing through the 30R, 70T beam splitter, the TEST light
course reflects from a 45 degree first surface mirror; and on to a
perpendicular first surface mirror; back to the 45 degree mirror;
through the BS; and on to the painted metal target bonded to the front
of the laser. That target has a precision pin hole to allow the laser
light to pass through. Because the light diverges about .5 degree, by
the time it reflects back to the target, the fringe pattern is a clear
3/8" diameter with about 8 fringes.
The reason my interferometer works, and the M-M didn't, is
because M-M had BOTH light courses reflect from the 45 degree mirror!
So, the lateral motion of the apparatus affected both of its light
courses, identically. My interferometer has an effective physical
length change of the light course that reflects from the 45 degree
mirror. The faster the Earth's velocity component, the further off
center the light hits the 45 degree mirror, and the greater is the
physical change in the length of that course. As Michelson knew, a
physical change of length (via screws) of ONE COURSE of his
interferometer allowed making precise measurements—like the "official"
meter stick. But when he let Earth's velocity "move" the light, both
courses reflected from the 45 degree BS, and so both TIMES of travel
remained identical…
If any of those two dozen universities that I've sent all of my
information to had been objective, they have had more than enough time
to replicate my results. So, THAT is the real reason it SEEMS that I
am keeping my experiment to myself. There just aren't any (ha, ha...)
“scientists” out there objective enough to buck the status quo of
stupidity at ALL USA universities! Note: Exceptions to the latter are
URGED to ask for my experiment descriptions! — NoEinstein —

On Apr 22, 1:07*am, "Tom Potter" wrote:
"NoEinstein" wrote in message

...



Dear Tom: *Your trying to ascertain the "understanding" of the basics
by you students is like my trying to walk people like Randy Poe
through my Coriolis invalidation. *The "power" that students have over
teachers is that they can keep saying they... "Don't get it."

The problem is not with students who say:
"I don't get it."

The problem is with students who think they know it all,
and are what we called "sharpshooters"
when I taught servicemen at Fort Monmouth.

The "sharpshooters" latch onto some
nominal point, and in their effort to
try to appear cool and intelligent,
they waste the time of the class.

"sharpshooters" be they in class,
in a newsgroup, or in an organization
turn cooperation and order into
conflict and chaos.

It was easy to cure the "sharpshooters"
in the Military schools,
as all we had to do to wise them up
was to pull their liberty passes.

The problem is hard to solve in
other venue, such as newsgroups.
Unfortunately the only options seem to be
to either ignore them
or get down in the gutter with them.

--
Tom Potter

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/ind...m/PotterPhotos

** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

Dear Tom: :-) — NoEinstein —

On Apr 22, 1:18*am, "Tom Potter" wrote:
"NoEinstein" wrote in message

...
On Apr 21, 8:18 am, "Tom Potter" wrote:





"
?=
wrote in message

.. .

What makes you believe Art Deco could understand
â?o integer units of action â? ? !

He couldn't understand potty humor if it exeeded one line.
We're like idiot savants with non-overlapping esoteric talents;
so one man's talent can't be seen by the other.

Actually Art Deco understands, and does,
his job very well.

Art works out of the caliballista.org boiler-room,
which is operated by a few Jewish bigots,
and used to intimidate and smear people,
that the bigots target.

Art's job is not to engage in rational, intelligent, moral
discussions to arrive at fundamental truths,

but his job is to smear folks, and obscure threads
on issues that his handlers don't want to have
the public exposed to.

Art does his job in several ways.

1. He ****es out posters,
and gets them off the issue,
and into a ****ing war.

2. He tries to link his victims
with negative images, negative ideas,
and negative people.

3. He appends alt.usenet.kook
to threads he wants to disrupt
in order to instigate a flame war between
the poster, the caliballista, boiler-rook bigots,
and the young boys and sociopaths
who hang out in alt.usenet.kook.

Art does a pretty good job
directing the activities of a few race/religion motivated bigots,
and in exploiting inferiority complexes in a few
sociopaths and young boys,
who tend to boost their egos by demeaning folks.
( Note that Art also exploits the inferiority complexes
of young boys and sociopaths in the serious newsgroups,
and gets some of them to append alt.usenet.kook to posts.

The Republican Party,
and now the Clinton gang
use the same tactics
used by the calaballista.org race motivated bigots,
and the tactic must work,
as they spend millions of dollars
trying to divert the attention of people
from facts and details.

I dare say that if Obama becomes president,
the masses will begin to turn aggressively on the
bigots, media, and politicians who use
smear as a weapon to promote their agenda,
which could not be promote successfully
using logic, intelligence and facts.

Hopefully, when the public gets sick of the
smear tactics, laws will be passed that make
it easy for folks smeared by Institutionalized Bigotry
to collect damages from the individuals and
organization that effected the smears.

The definition of "bigot" is:
"A prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his
own."

To read the stories of a few of the many folks
who have been victims of Institutionalized bigotry
visit the web site below.

http://www.zundelsite.org/english/debate/victims/index.html

--
Tom Potter

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/ind...crazyideas.blo...

** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**

-- Dear Tom: *If Obama becomes President, the USA is probably doomed...

Considering that - NoEinstein -
is making Einstein look good,

and considering that he is opposed to Obama,
the only candidate for president
that is not totally controlled by the Jewish lobby,

one has to wonder if - NoEinstein -
is a shill,

working for the Einstein Cult,
and the War-for-Profit Gang.

--
Tom Potter

http://www.geocities.com/tdp1001/ind...m/PotterPhotos

** Posted fromhttp://www.teranews.com**- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Dear Tom: Obama is a "minority" candidate supported by "minority"
Jews. TIME-Warner and CNN network are hugely biased toward Obama.
The publishers of science texts are mostly controlled by Jews; and
those love the fact that they make so much money trying to "explain"
Einstein. Einstein was a Jew, and Jews get their egos boosted by
letting him remain unchallenged. So, you could rightly say that Jews
are the primary reason my Einstein disproofs haven't gotten to the
front pages. Do you agree? :-) — NoEinstein —