Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 622:
Line 622: + + + +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 00:00, August 17, 2011
, 00:00, August 17, 2011→Attempt at Helping the Consensus Along: I'm referring to academic physicists - a very liberal group indeed. Probably 80% or more of them voted for Obama, for example.
::::::::: Where have you read that this is not true about Newtonian Mechanics? Academic sources, please.
::::::::: Where have you read that this is not true about Newtonian Mechanics? Academic sources, please.
::::::::: With "liberals" are you referring also to non-physicists? Because, as you can easily imagine, their opinions don't have much value... --[[User:MM87|<font color="#E56717">'''MM'''</font>]]''[[User_talk:MM87|<font color="#FBB117">'''''87'''''</font>]] 15:43, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
::::::::: With "liberals" are you referring also to non-physicists? Because, as you can easily imagine, their opinions don't have much value... --[[User:MM87|<font color="#E56717">'''MM'''</font>]]''[[User_talk:MM87|<font color="#FBB117">'''''87'''''</font>]] 15:43, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::: I'm referring to academic physicists - a very liberal group indeed. Probably 80% or more of them voted for Obama, for example. Do you doubt it?
:::::::::: The advance of the perihelion of Mercury (point 6) can be explained in Newtonian mechanics by tweaking the exponent of distance in the basic gravity equation. But no amount of tweaking is possible in Relativity to make the theory fit the data. So the liberals simply ignore the most recent data, and censor any criticism of Relativity based on this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:00, 16 August 2011 (EDT)