A Physics forum. Physics Banter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » Physics Banter forum » Physics Newsgroups » The Theory of Relativity
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Tags: , , , ,

Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Ballisticus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 202
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.
Ads
  #2  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Robert J. Kolker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,615
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.



Ballisticus wrote:

Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.


Logic has a high place in science. It is how you derive predictions from
the axioms of the theory and auxillary hypotheses. That is why physics
theories are expressed mathematically, so that logic can be applied
unambiguously.

Bob Kolker

  #3  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Bill Hobba
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,088
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.


"Ballisticus" B@.. wrote in message
...
Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson,

Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have

some
kind of chance.


Get lost troll.

Bill


  #4  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Perfectly Innocent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,068
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

B@..(Ballisticus) wrote in message . ..

Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?


You present an extraordinarily compelling argument but it's possible
that you've misjudged one or two persons on your list. Conceivably
and perhaps coincidentally, they all may be fanatical, unreasoning
religious relativists, blinded by their egocentric worship of the
universe, loving to spend their time misrepresenting and distorting
true science, but that doesn't mean that there can't be a flawlessly
perfect version and true interpretation of relativity.

Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
  #5  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Dirk Van de moortel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,355
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.


"Ballisticus" B@.. wrote in message ...
Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.


http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di...hangeName.html
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di...LogicBull.html

Dirk Vdm


  #6  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
YBM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 110
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

Ballisticus wrote:
Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?


You are very unfair, I even published a good friend of you :
http://zgub.homelinux.org/RH/Precess...pendencies.pdf

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.


The kind of "logic" which make Androcleps say that :

"The dog has v' velocity in the my frame (not as in any other frame,
since it is not a lightdog) and at the same time v'-v relative velocity
with the running moron Androcles, when measured in my frame".

is ok, and that :

"Light has c velocity in the K frame (as in any other frame, like the k
one) and at the same time c-v relative velocity with the moving initial
point of k, when measured in the K frame."

is absurd ? Or the one which makes him pretend that
"a xor b" does not imply "a or b" ?
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di...Gibberish.html

or the kind of "logic" which makes another stupid australian (poor
Australia) pretend to solve the 3-body problem with the crappiest
50 lines programs one could write in visual basic ?


  #7  
Old June 4th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Henri Wilson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,253
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 19:34:00 +0200, YBM wrote:

Ballisticus wrote:
Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?


You are very unfair, I even published a good friend of you :
http://zgub.homelinux.org/RH/Precess...pendencies.pdf

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.


The kind of "logic" which make Androcleps say that :

"The dog has v' velocity in the my frame (not as in any other frame,
since it is not a lightdog) and at the same time v'-v relative velocity
with the running moron Androcles, when measured in my frame".

is ok, and that :

"Light has c velocity in the K frame (as in any other frame, like the k
one) and at the same time c-v relative velocity with the moving initial
point of k, when measured in the K frame."

is absurd ? Or the one which makes him pretend that
"a xor b" does not imply "a or b" ?
http://users.pandora.be/vdmoortel/di...Gibberish.html

or the kind of "logic" which makes another stupid australian (poor
Australia) pretend to solve the 3-body problem with the crappiest
50 lines programs one could write in visual basic ?


Try it again, now.
Henri Wilson.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
See how three orbiting bodies interact:
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/threebody.exe

See proof that light speed is source dependent.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/variablestars.exe
  #8  
Old June 5th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
rsm109@york.ac.uk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 153
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

B@..(Ballisticus) wrote in message . ..
Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.


I don't think the word "logic" means what you think it does.
  #9  
Old June 5th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
John Anderson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 629
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

Challenging indiduals based on name without stating what the challenge they
have to address is kind of meaningless.

John Anderson

Ballisticus wrote:

Van Moortel, Varney, Bilge, Kokler, Hobba, Evens, Wormsley, Anderson, Czuhai,
YBM, Heymann, Smith, Old Man, Uncle Al, EjP...etc etc....

How would you like to pick a debating team from that lot?

Maybe if the subject was "Logic has no place in science" you might have some
kind of chance.




  #10  
Old June 5th 04 posted to sci.physics.relativity
Perfectly Innocent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,068
Default Living Proof That Relativity Must be Wrong.

John Anderson wrote in message ...
Challenging indiduals based on name without stating what the challenge they
have to address is kind of meaningless.

John Anderson


Since you yourself are guilty of this, I see it as justification for
why you are on the list.

Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Proof that HUP is wrong Schoenfeld Physics - General Discussion 29 July 1st 05 12:06 AM
Chemical bonding inside living vs non-living things bob Physics - General Discussion 0 December 1st 04 02:25 AM
Why relativity is wrong wespe Physics - General Discussion 35 June 3rd 04 06:03 PM
Living proof of God Proctologically Violated©® Physics - General Discussion 0 April 3rd 04 10:07 AM
Living proof of God Proctologically Violated©® Physics - General Discussion 0 April 3rd 04 10:07 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright ©2004-2008 Physics Banter, part of the NewsgroupBanter project.
The comments are property of their posters.
Personal Loans - Best Credit Cards - Classical Christian Homeschooling - Direct TV - Credit Counseling