Changes

|-

|-

|November 28, 2009<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&oldid=724599</ref>

|November 28, 2009<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_Relativity&oldid=724599</ref>

|Conservapedia asserts that the [[Theory of relativity]] is false, and creates the page [[Counterexamples to Relativity]], initially containing 10 counterexamples.  By mid 2016 the number will have grown to 49.

|Conservapedia asserts that the [[Theory of relativity]] is false, and creates the page [[Counterexamples to Relativity]], initially containing 10 counterexamples.  By mid 2016 the number will have grown to 49.  The page [[Essay:Rebuttal to Counterexamples to Relativity]] is created, refuting all 49 of them.

|Widespread ridicule all across the internet.  98% of Google hits are sarcastic.  No one who questions this well-established theory would get employment as a high school science teacher, much less a PhD or college tenure.

|Widespread ridicule all across the internet.  98% of Google hits are sarcastic.  No one who questions this well-established theory would get employment as a high school science teacher, much less a PhD or college tenure.

|A ''New Scientist'' article, entitled "Breaking relativity," declares that celestial signals defy the theory.

|A ''New Scientist'' article, with the eye-catching title "Breaking relativity," declares that celestial signals "defy" the theory.  It's about the disconnect between relativity an quantum mechanics at the Planck scale, a phenomenon which has been known for years.  It gets added as counterexample #8, and is rebutted as rebuttal #8.

|July 12, 2016

|July 12, 2016

|-

|-