Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #659890
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Anti-relativist |
| Date | 2024-12-27 23:51 -0800 |
| Organization | The Starmaker Organization |
| Message-ID | <676FAE1C.137A@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
| References | <676B17D4.697B@ix.netcom.com> <BnWdnWr9ULmP0_b6nZ2dnZfqnPQAAAAA@giganews.com> <676B863D.7825@ix.netcom.com> <676EF66B.6454@ix.netcom.com> |
In other words, ... nobody can agree what time it is now because nobody knows what time it is now. Nobody. Frame of reference is false reference. The Starmaker wrote: > > Let me put it this way.. > > There is only one thing > that caused life on earth.. > > but with so many people trying to > guess what that is, you get > billions of different reasons. > > But there is still only one reason. > > Problem is...you have too many frames of references. > > You need to first get rid of this 'thing' you call...'frames of > reference'. > > It creates too much misinformation. > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > Ross Finlayson wrote: > > > > > > Merry Christmas to you, too. Happy Hanukkah > > > > > > Now go away > > > > The Truth is... > > > > there is no relativity between two clocks! > > > > There is no relation between two clocks. > > > > There are no forces between two clocks that > > would in any way affect one clock from another. > > > > NOTHING! No relations to each other!! > > > > The Truth is... > > > > there is no relativity between two clocks! > > > > Does one clock slow the other clock down? > > > > Of course not! > > > > There is no relation between two clocks. > > > > Does one clock even care what time it is on the other clock???? > > > > there is no relativity between two clocks > > > > And Ross, I don't recall giving you permission to post here... > > > > The Starmaker wrote: > > > > > > Anti-relativist? in Einstein's day means anti-JewishPhysics > > > > > > dats wat dey used to call yous in einstein day. > > > > > > einstein cult deniers > > > > > > 'Jewish physics' > > > > > > "Galilean Electrodynamics"? > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Einstein's Science > > > > > > Albert Einstein is prejudiced against any scientist who is > > > not of his religion and race. > > > > > > As he once told a Catholic Priest "...your grasp of physics is > > > 'abominable'." > > > > > > Which means :repugnantly hateful; detestable; loathsome > > > > > > despicable > > > contemptible > > > damnable > > > cursed > > > accursed > > > diabolical > > > disgusting > > > revolting > > > repellent > > > repulsive > > > offensive > > > repugnant > > > abhorrent > > > reprehensible > > > atrocious > > > horrifying > > > execrable > > > foul > > > vile > > > wretched > > > miserable > > > horrible > > > awful > > > dreadful > > > appalling > > > abysmal > > > brutal > > > nauseating > > > horrid > > > nasty > > > disagreeable > > > unpleasant > > > distasteful > > > terrible > > > shocking > > > godawful > > > beastly > > > > > > Einstein use a lot of hate speech on other scientist who are not > > > of his religion and race. > > > > > > In other words, if you are not > > > of his religion and race...then you are "No men of science," > > > EINSTEIN:"No men of science," > > > > > > As you can see for yourself in this conversation he had with a > > > reporter... > > > > > > http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1921-04-03/ed-1/seq-3/ > > > http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1921-04-03/ed-1/seq-3/ocr/ > > > http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1921-04-03/ed-1/seq-3.pdf > > > > > > REPORTER:""Why were men of science opposed > > > to your theory when you first made it > > > known ?" > > > EINSTEIN:"No men of science," he replied, em > > > phasizing the last'word, "were against > > > the theory." > > > REPORTER:"But there was some opposition?" > > > EINSTEIN:"Yes," was the quiet reply, "but that > > > was purely political. Even the physicists who opposed my theory did so > > > for > > > political reasons?in my opinion, o' > > > course." > > > REPORTER:"What do you mean when you say > > > the opposition was political?" > > > EINSTEIN:"Anti-Semitism," was the scientist's > > > answer. "Because I am a Jew." "" > > > > > > Okay, here is more of what Albert Einstein was thinking: > > > > > > Reporter: "Why were men of science opposed > > > to your theory when you first made it > > > known ?" > > > > > > Einstein: 'No fucking men of SCIENCE were against the theory.' > > > > > > Reporter: "But there was some opposition?" > > > > > > Einstein: 'Yeah, but that > > > was motherfuckin purely political. Even those fucking physi-cists who > > > opposed my theory did so for > > > stupid political reasons, that's a fact jack.' > > > > > > Reporter: "What do you mean when you say > > > the opposition was political?" > > > > > > Einstein: 'They are fuckin Anti-Semitics. Fuckin Jew Haters! Because > > > they know I'm a fucking Jew.' > -- > The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, > to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, > and challenge the unchallengeable. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Anti-relativist The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-24 12:21 -0800
Re: Anti-relativist Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-12-24 16:13 -0800
Re: Anti-relativist The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-24 20:12 -0800
Re: Anti-relativist Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2024-12-25 11:10 -0800
Re: Anti-relativist The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-27 10:48 -0800
Re: Anti-relativist The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2024-12-27 23:51 -0800
csiph-web