On Jul 4, 5:38 pm, wrote:
http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

Those who were deceived by the Apollo Hoax will be remembered, for
eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the surface of
this planet.

Fools of such bigotry in denial of their denial, to say the least.

Hot and cold wars have been caused and/or extended by this little
fiasco, our valuable resources and some of our best talents diverted,
and decades of true advancements lost forever. Par for the American
and Zionist Third Reich way of doing such things.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 5, 9:35 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 4, 5:38 pm, wrote:

http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

Those who were deceived by theApolloHoax will be remembered, for
eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the surface of
this planet.

Fools of such bigotry in denial of their denial, to say the least.

Hot and cold wars have been caused and/or extended by this little
fiasco, our valuable resources and some of our best talents diverted,
and decades of true advancements lost forever. Par for the American
and Zionist Third Reich way of doing such things.
-
Brad Guth

BTW, Venus is not a wussy point source of a star, but even though, it
would have been unavoidably recorded as somewhat brighter than Earth,
whereas apparently instead it became entirely invisible on each and
every Apollo mission, as did a good half dozen other pesky items that
should have easily been within the DR(dynamic range) of those
unfiltered Kodak moments.

Any 3D interactive orbital simulator proves that we've been snookered,
and then some.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 5, 1:36 pm, The_Man wrote:
On Jul 4, 8:38 pm, wrote:

http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

Those who were deceived by the Apollo Hoax will be remembered, for
eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the surface of
this planet.

The idea that man (or woman) has actually walked on this planet
(Earth) is a hoax perpertrated by NASA to perpetuate funding. America
was never disovered by Columbus - it was a hoax by the Spanish. The
"fact" that the earth revolves around the sun was a hoax perpetrated
by Copernicus, so he could perpetuate his funding and fool the saps.

Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?

On Jul 5, 11:47 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Jul 5, 1:36 pm, The_Man wrote:

On Jul 4, 8:38 pm, wrote:
http://www.iamthewitness.com/NASA-exposes-Apollo.html

Those who were deceived by the Apollo Hoax will be remembered, for
eternity, as the greatest fools ever to have walked the surface of
this planet.

The idea that man (or woman) has actually walked on this planet
(Earth) is a hoax perpertrated by NASA to perpetuate funding. America
was never disovered by Columbus - it was a hoax by the Spanish. The
"fact" that the earth revolves around the sun was a hoax perpetrated
by Copernicus, so he could perpetuate his funding and fool the saps.

Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?

God, never do anything useful, you'll be pecked to death by ducks.

On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:

Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?

Those relativity theories of Einstein's are pretty good theories as
there has NEVER been a prediction of either that was contradicted by
an observation. Hard to beat that, eh Wublee!

On the contrary, it is easy to show how the observations have been
fudged to predict the predictions.

** The time dilation part as predicted by the Lorentz transform which
forms the mathematical basis of the interpretation known as the
special theory of relativity has never proven its symmetry. Remember
the twin's paradox is the manifestation of the time dilation and the
principle of relativity in which both are properties of the Lorentz
transform.

** Since the geodesic model of the most popular interpretation to the
mathematics of spacetime generally follow the paths of the maximum
accumulated spacetime, a photon should never propagate through space
in this model. Historically, Einstein proclaimed twice the Newtonian
result on bending of light after the Schwarzschild metric was
identified by Hilbert. In doing so, Einstein argued the gravitational
time dilation of the dt^2 term should contribute an amount equivalent
to the Newtonian result and the dr^2 term also the same. Well, so far
with all these many derivations where one obviously liberally copying
each other have never nailed down the proper integration limits, and
yet all come out to support Einstein's prediction without any
mathematical backing. The prediction part is very questionable
already. Now, the 1919 expeditions by Sir Eddington fudged the
observations to account for Einstein's prediction. In the 60's,
Shipiro's experiment did not prove light bending but gravitational
time dilation. These two phenomena are very different. On top of
that, Shipiro's experiment is very questionable.

** The prediction of Mercury's orbital anomaly is totally based on
the geodesics following the paths of maximal spacetime. And yet, it
does not include the effect where the Schwarzschild metric yields a
slightly higher different balancing centrifugal acceleration. That is
Mercury has to travel at a slightly higher speed to balance between
the gravitational pull and the centrifugal push. The geodesic model
according to the principle of least time actually predicts the
observation but fails at the some certain distance that gravitational
effect suddenly becomes antigravity.

** GPS does not need any GR or SR for its design.

You must be awfully religious to conclude the observations really fit
into SR and GR predictions. shrug If so, you need to follow the
great reverend Hammond to bring more spiritual satisfactions. shrug

"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:

Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?

Those relativity theories of Einstein's are pretty good theories as
there has NEVER been a prediction of either that was contradicted by
an observation. Hard to beat that, eh Wublee!

On the contrary, it is easy to show how the observations have been
fudged to predict the predictions.

** The time dilation part as predicted by the Lorentz transform which
forms the mathematical basis of the interpretation known as the
special theory of relativity has never proven its symmetry. Remember
the twin's paradox is the manifestation of the time dilation and the
principle of relativity in which both are properties of the Lorentz
transform.

So? Twin paradox is observed, time dilation is observed. No fudging there

** Since the geodesic model of the most popular interpretation to the
mathematics of spacetime generally follow the paths of the maximum
accumulated spacetime, a photon should never propagate through space
in this model. Historically, Einstein proclaimed twice the Newtonian
result on bending of light after the Schwarzschild metric was
identified by Hilbert. In doing so, Einstein argued the gravitational
time dilation of the dt^2 term should contribute an amount equivalent
to the Newtonian result and the dr^2 term also the same. Well, so far
with all these many derivations where one obviously liberally copying
each other have never nailed down the proper integration limits, and
yet all come out to support Einstein's prediction without any
mathematical backing. The prediction part is very questionable
already. Now, the 1919 expeditions by Sir Eddington fudged the
observations to account for Einstein's prediction. In the 60's,
Shipiro's experiment did not prove light bending but gravitational
time dilation. These two phenomena are very different. On top of
that, Shipiro's experiment is very questionable.

That one or two people might fudge does nothing to lessen the record of SR.

** The prediction of Mercury's orbital anomaly is totally based on
the geodesics following the paths of maximal spacetime. And yet, it
does not include the effect where the Schwarzschild metric yields a
slightly higher different balancing centrifugal acceleration. That is
Mercury has to travel at a slightly higher speed to balance between
the gravitational pull and the centrifugal push. The geodesic model
according to the principle of least time actually predicts the
observation but fails at the some certain distance that gravitational
effect suddenly becomes antigravity.

WTF are you on about there?

** GPS does not need any GR or SR for its design.

Irrelevant

You must be awfully religious to conclude the observations really fit
into SR and GR predictions.

No .. just scientific

Jeckyl wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?
Those relativity theories of Einstein's are pretty good theories as
there has NEVER been a prediction of either that was contradicted by
an observation. Hard to beat that, eh Wublee!
On the contrary, it is easy to show how the observations have been
fudged to predict the predictions.

** The time dilation part as predicted by the Lorentz transform which
forms the mathematical basis of the interpretation known as the
special theory of relativity has never proven its symmetry. Remember
the twin's paradox is the manifestation of the time dilation and the
principle of relativity in which both are properties of the Lorentz
transform.

So? Twin paradox is observed,

Really? When? Where?

Cheers,

Rich

On Jul 5, 9:28 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:

Koobee Wublee wrote:
Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?

Those relativity theories of Einstein's are pretty good theories as
there has NEVER been a prediction of either that was contradicted by
an observation. Hard to beat that, eh Wublee!

On the contrary, it is easy to show how the observations have been
fudged to predict the predictions.

Then do it.

All you do is talk, talk, talk. But when it comes time to put your
money where your mouth is, you run like the little bitch you are.

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.p...3?dmode=source

You couldn't support your arguments in that thread, or answer my
simple questions. Why should anyone believe you can support yet
another load of bull****?

[snip remaining lying and general stupidity]

On Jul 5, 9:36 pm, "Jeckyl" wrote:

[...]

** GPS does not need any GR or SR for its design.

Irrelevant

Actually it is blatant lying. He knows what he says is not true, but
says it anyway despite people correcting him dozens of times with
explicit references to the design documents.

[...]

On Jul 5, 9:56 pm, Rich wrote:
Jeckyl wrote:
"Koobee Wublee" wrote in message
roups.com...
On Jul 5, 10:04 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
Koobee Wublee wrote:
Does this also go with the crap that is supposed to be credited as
Einstein's work --- namely the special and the general theories of
relativity?
Those relativity theories of Einstein's are pretty good theories as
there has NEVER been a prediction of either that was contradicted by
an observation. Hard to beat that, eh Wublee!
On the contrary, it is easy to show how the observations have been
fudged to predict the predictions.

** The time dilation part as predicted by the Lorentz transform which
forms the mathematical basis of the interpretation known as the
special theory of relativity has never proven its symmetry. Remember
the twin's paradox is the manifestation of the time dilation and the
principle of relativity in which both are properties of the Lorentz
transform.

So? Twin paradox is observed,

Really? When? Where?

Cheers,

Rich

Hafele-Keating.