Desperate denial of General Relativity by The God

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by The God, Jun 4, 2016.

  1. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,338
    You were all over him like a cheap suit when you thought he was supporting you. Listen to RPenner you said.
    But now that he's called you out, suddenly it's RPenner should be silent!

    Problem is:
    1] You haven't met the mininum requirement for making your case; you keep putting the onus on others. Show us your formulation for a parallelogram and how it is not what we observe.
    2] Since you have not defended your idea, at some point there is nothing left to discuss but the fact that you keep making unsupported claims. Support your claims and we'll discuss that.
    But they're not really fact-based, are they? They're what you call common sense. Which unfortunately, doesn't apply.

    I know how you feel. I have limits to my knowledge too. Everyone does. But I know where they are, and when I decide to cross them, it's in the form of questions to my academic betters.
     
    paddoboy likes this.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    Thats quite stupid.

    You do not know that a Moderator, toned down judge, who has the resources to ban you from this place, should not show any bias or personal inclination.

    And I am never afraid of calling a spade a spade.

    1. Rpenner is good, extremely knowledgeable, I wonder why an academic like him is spending so much time here, he asserts mainstream because he understands the models and he is an insider. Absolutely fair despite my criticism.

    2. Paddoboy, highly enthusiastic about subject, lacks even the high school education but compensated that with his enthusiasm and incessant pursuit of the subject. He has no multifaceted understanding of science / maths, so he cannot be critical. His behavior apart, whatever he does suits him, again despite my criticism and take on him.

    3. You and likes of Origins, Exchemists, Physbangs, Russ Waters.

    You fall in the category of educated duffers. You are education wise better equipped than Paddoboy but lack the stellar education of Rpenner. You have the required educational understanding to ask questions and raise serious critical discussions, but no, you have accepted these critical theories without an iota of murmur. You represent the mass which is more interested in their daily bread and butter and accept everything pushed on them be it political or anyother arena.
     
    danshawen likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,338
    RPenner has been extremely patient with you, concentrating on facts. At some point though, the facts are exhausted, and fanciful ideas are substituted. It is up to him to call it as he sees it.


    I see an entire post dedicated to ad hominems - which are, by definition, off-topic. You have completely side-stepped the fact that you haven't been able to make your case, which is what this thread is about.

    At some point, in 200 posts, you have a responsbility to concede that fact. It doesn't automatically mean your ideas are wrong, it simply means you haven't been able to support them. (You put labels on others as wanting in scientific prowess - what label do you put on yourself, not having been able to make your case? No one here has prevented you from laying out everything you've got. That's the nature of a public forum.)

    But how do you think this is going to go from here? Unless you're holding back some amazing corroborating facts, you've asserted every assertion there is to assert.

    OK. Now what?
     
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2016
    paddoboy likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    A continuation of the same unsupported nonsense.
    The force [agenda] is strong in this one.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    I just responded to your post.

    As far as now what ? Let's all take a long walk...Things are not going to change so soon....but by 2025.
     
  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,338
    Yes. With ad hominems. Which is not a valid response.

    My post addressed your arguments. Your post addressed the arguers. Big difference.
     
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    By 3025 GR will still be with us and still used to within its bounds of applicability.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    You and I will be long dead and buried and returned to star stuff!.
     
  12. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,074
    You have made no argument, your calling me of lollypollying Rpenner was bullshit....
     
  13. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    It's absolutely true actually.
    As I have told you before, prior to rpenner assuming mod duties, you were mentioning James in near every post...
    I worked out long ago that you were somewhat of an actor, Bollywood style and in many posts since, your acting, pretentious, and sometimes indignant posts were there for all to see.
    And when either had finally had enough of your innane acting, pretense and anti science nonsense and you were issued with infractions and bans, it was then that the victimisation claims and that they were picking on you raised its ugly head.
    The forum is most respects now I believe is awake to your predictable antics, as reflected in your posts.
     
  14. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,620
    The speed of light slows down in a transparent medium, and this makes optical lensing possible. The speed of time slows (intervals of time dilate) near a gravitating body, and this is what makes gravitational lensing possible. Both effects can be interpreted as curvature, but time itself is NOT equivalent to the speed of light. Minkowski only said time was proportional, and with a one way arrow he implemented mathematically with complex numbers. Minkowski also said no two events are ever simultaneous. In this he was wrong (because this excludes quantum entanglement), but Minkowski's formulation of Special Relativity is consistent as far as we can tell for bulk bound or unbound energy traveling or propagating at speeds <= c. We have already discussed this at length in the Minkowski thread and elsewhere where I have relented on my earlier assertion that Minkowski was wrong. His math isn't wrong. But it is incomplete.
     

Share This Page