Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 663: Line 663:  
In the end you can also squelch truth in real science by determining that truth by the undeniable science and math facts written here or to live according to truth. Either is your choice but squelching will only suppress science facts and true science. So I am going to write the science and math that shows undeniable truth and you can decide. [[User:StevenCrum|StevenCrum]] 16:31, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
In the end you can also squelch truth in real science by determining that truth by the undeniable science and math facts written here or to live according to truth. Either is your choice but squelching will only suppress science facts and true science. So I am going to write the science and math that shows undeniable truth and you can decide. [[User:StevenCrum|StevenCrum]] 16:31, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:Yeah.  Sure.  You, with only a mediocre grasp on the process of writing have a proof simple enough to put on wikipedia, yet it has evaded the planet's most brilliant scientists and mathematicians, essentially the brightest men in human history, for a century.  I'd like to see this. [[User:RodWeathers|RodWeathers]] 17:57, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 
:Yeah.  Sure.  You, with only a mediocre grasp on the process of writing have a proof simple enough to put on wikipedia, yet it has evaded the planet's most brilliant scientists and mathematicians, essentially the brightest men in human history, for a century.  I'd like to see this. [[User:RodWeathers|RodWeathers]] 17:57, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
 +
::Okay, I did some basic googling, and find that you've been going on about this for several years now, but have a pitifully poor grasp of relativistic theory.  Well... welcome to Conservapedia, I guess. We're nothing if not openminded. [[User:RodWeathers|RodWeathers]] 18:03, 31 October 2008 (EDT)
1,035

edits

Navigation menu