|
|
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:31:46 -0700 (PDT), PD <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Jul 21, 5:51 pm, HW@....(Dr. Henri Wilson) wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 08:17:00 -0700 (PDT), PD <TheDraperFam...@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >That may be the case, but the acceptance of relativity does not hinge
>> >on the MMX. The MMX *may* have offered a peek that inspired the guess
>> >that Einstein made (though that isn't historically clear either), but
>> >what sealed relativity versus the emission theory of light are two
>> >happenstances that had nothing to do with the MMX.
>> >1. A number of other experimental consequences that were predicted by
>> >SR that turned out to be right.
>>
>> there are none.
>>
>> >2. A number of experimental consequences that were predicted by the
>> >emission theory of light that turned out to be wrong.
>>
>> They have all been shown to be wrong.
>>
>> >The fact that the MMX alone cannot discriminate between the two
>> >theories is irrelevant.
>>
>> The MMX is just one of many experiments that supports BaTh.
>>
>
>"Henry", as a big of tactical advice, if you're going to mount a
>disinformation campaign, it's extremely important to do so from a
>position of credibility. Since you are a known and storied
>pathological liar, and since you have freely admitted that you have
>read nothing which you attempt to discredit, and have been shown to be
>generally incompetent in the subject innumerable times, you may find
>your position to be less than ideal for the attempt.
Draper, your defence has sunk to such a low level that your only remaining
argument is to persistently call me a liar. Why don't you behave like a man and
admit defeat.
No matter what you say or think, there is no doubt that Einsteinian relativity
is now known to be pure nonsense from start to finish.
>PD
Henri Wilson. ASTC,BSc,DSc(T)
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm
All religion involves selling a nonexistant product to gullible unfortunates.
Einstein cleverly exploited this principle with his second postulate.
|
|