I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

--
Nate Hill

"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" writes:

I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

They are all from the same person, who writes under the pseudonym of "Retiche."
He is using daily nym-shifting in a futile attempt to evade both KILLfiles
and the cancelbots. He SPAMs the same old crap, day after day, week afetr week,
on a rotating schedule that he believes technically complies to the letter of
AOL's anti-SPAM policy, even though it clearly violating its spirit in entirety.
(One of "Retiche's" SPAMs is a SPAM explaining why his SPAM is not in fact SPAM,
and that there is absolutely nothing morally wrong with his daily nym-shifting
in a blatant attempt to try to shove his SPAM down the throats of people who
have KILLfiled him because they are sick and tired of his SPAMming crap daily;
the fact of the matter is that SPAM is still SPAM, regardless of whether AOL
considers it SPAM or not, and that furthermore, as another poster has noted,
the Breidbart Index of "Retiche's" SPAMs exceeds 20, so that his SPAMs are
not only officially SPAM, but _CANCELABLE_ SPAM.)

I have filed over thirty complaints with AOL about "Retiche's" cancelable SPAM
and his blatant use of num-shifgting to evade KILLfiles and cancelbots, and so far,
they have not even done me the courtesy of an auto-reply, like most reputable ISPs.
I have therefore concluded that AOL is =NOT= a reputable ISP, and that it does not
give a rat's @$$ about aiding and abetting SPAMmers --- and since virtually
no one I _respect_ uses AOL as their ISP, I have KILLfiled their entire domain.
(At some point, I intend write AOL's President and CEO a registered letter
explaining that I have KILLfiled =ALL= of their customers because their
policy of allowing unlimited nym-shifting aids and abets SPAMmers, and
because their refusal to reply to SPAM complaints clearly send the message
that they do _not_ in fact care if their customers send SPAM, regardless of
what they claim their "Official Policy" is; perhaps _that_ will get some action...)


-- Gordon D. Pusch

perl -e '$_ = \n"; s/NO\.//; s/SPAM\.//; print;'

"Gordon D. Pusch" wrote in message
...
They are all from the same person, who writes under
the pseudonym of "Retiche."
I have filed over thirty complaints with AOL about "Retiche's" ...)
-- Gordon D. Pusch

AHahahahahah..........ahahahahaha.........
Grodi Gordy........it appears that you have to address much more
severe mental problems then "Retiche" does:
++ = Complaining for 30+ times about a fart in cyber space......
and then to be such a chicken **** to redirect your own turd
to alt.falme....AHhahahahahaha........ahahahahanson

You have a very good observation. However, your research has missed these
ubiquitous posts worshipping Einstein. One particular cult from the desert
of the Southwest even patiently combs through all the literature ever
created by man from "The Iliad" to "Gravity" to determine if it is OK to
wipe their asses after taking a dump. If Einstein did not say to do so,
they won't do so.

* * *

"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message
...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

--
Nate Hill

"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message m...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

Television says that Einstein invented all of physics.

No one can be smart unless they 'prove Einstein wrong'.

They are just re-enforcing suppositions and inferences that they see
and hear on television.

(Coreleus Corneleus) wrote in message . com...
"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message m...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

Television says that Einstein invented all of physics.

Could you elaborate on this claim? Got any specific examples? I
haven't witnessed this myself, which is why I ask. In fact, I have
seen recent shows on cable that mention contributions from many many
physicists of the last 4 centuries.


No one can be smart unless they 'prove Einstein wrong'.

I don't see the logic in this thinking. Lot's of people have shown
themselves to be smart by building on top of what Einstein
accomplished.


They are just re-enforcing suppositions and inferences that they see
and hear on television.

Patrick

(Coreleus Corneleus) wrote in message . com...
"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message m...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

Television says that Einstein invented all of physics.

Could you elaborate on this claim? Got any specific examples? I
haven't witnessed this myself, which is why I ask. In fact, I have
seen recent shows on cable that mention contributions from many many
physicists of the last 4 centuries.


No one can be smart unless they 'prove Einstein wrong'.

I don't see the logic in this thinking. Lot's of people have shown
themselves to be smart by building on top of what Einstein
accomplished.


They are just re-enforcing suppositions and inferences that they see
and hear on television.

Patrick

(Patrick Reany) wrote in message . com...
(Coreleus Corneleus) wrote in message . com...
"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message m...

Television says that Einstein invented all of physics.

Could you elaborate on this claim? Got any specific examples? I
haven't witnessed this myself, which is why I ask. In fact, I have
seen recent shows on cable that mention contributions from many many
physicists of the last 4 centuries.

Specific examples would not necessesarily be representative of the
general overview, and I do not necessesarily have time to go over all
of the portraysls of science in worthless publications and shows from
a wide array of sources.

If there are, however, a few good shows on physics, then that is a
good thing.


No one can be smart unless they 'prove Einstein wrong'.

I don't see the logic in this thinking. Lot's of people have shown
themselves to be smart by building on top of what Einstein
accomplished.

Neither do I, however not all thinking, necessesarily needs to be
logical.


They are just re-enforcing suppositions and inferences that they see
and hear on television.

Patrick

"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message m...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".


To little children, all knowledge is revealed knowledge. They don't
know anything about reality by firsthand experience, but only form the
words of this or that authority. The reality of their world stands and
falls with the reliability of their authorities. If the authorities
can be shown in error, then their reality shatters.

There's a certain type person who'll retain this way of thinking all
their life -- everything is just dogma and the very idea of seeing
something by themselves is far from their capabilities.

To such a person, it is important to discredit the *person* who
figured something out that they don't like. They cannot grasp that
reality is independent of the people who write about it, that
relativity is a fact even if Einstein were a child molestor. That the
authority of people is worthless in physics.

These people cannot actually invalidate relativity of course -- that's
as absurd as an ant stepping in the way of a tractor in an attempt to
stop it.

So they attempt to discredit what they phantasize to the the authority
who created what they phantasize to be a dogma -- they do not
understand that all the bile spewed at this person isn't going to
change a thing in the universe, that nobody cares about relativity
because they like Einstein. They cannot fathom that others have
actually figured out how relativity works and THAT it works and that
the particular originator of its mathematical formulation is utterly
uninteresting in this context.

They fight, I guess, like ants would fight when the tractor has rolled
through their hill. And I'm sure they think themselves bold fighters,
and they fight the only way they know, the only way they're capable
of.

The farmer in the tractor, meanwhile, is unlikely even to notice. If
he does, hit most probable comment is going to be "oops".

Or that some one is saying:

"Hey, look, Mom! The Emperor has no clothes on!"

When some one is brainwashed to think along one direction, it is rather
difficult to rectify that situation through self individual discipline. But
awakening due to outside logical stimulus lies in the intellectual might of
the same individual which most of the individuals lack.

Am I talking gibberish? Please let me know. Because after witnessing so
many sad stories, I cannot even tell if I am expressing BS or not.

* * *

"Coreleus Corneleus" wrote in message
om...
"Nathaniel A. A. Hill" wrote in message
m...
I haven't actually read any of these posts or articles but, I'm wondering
if
anyone can enlighten me as to their raison d'etre. It seems like the
sci.physics tree has been infested with said articles.

While I'm certainly not opposed to questioning Einsteins postulates it
seems
that these are particularly juvenile; half seem to originate from the
aol.com domain and the others are just as farcical, claiming the they are
"silly", "violations of common sense" and "illogical".

Television says that Einstein invented all of physics.

No one can be smart unless they 'prove Einstein wrong'.

They are just re-enforcing suppositions and inferences that they see
and hear on television.