Changes

None of your comments above address the margin of error, which must be the scientific focus.
Line 48: Line 48:     
::Thanks for clarifying your point about quantum mechanics. --[[User:KSorenson|KSorenson]] 20:35, 14 November 2009 (EST)
 
::Thanks for clarifying your point about quantum mechanics. --[[User:KSorenson|KSorenson]] 20:35, 14 November 2009 (EST)
 +
 +
:::Kate, as I said, I don't care either way, but I am going to tell the truth.  GR fit the observed data in 1916 (indeed, GR was developed to fit it), but now (due to more sophisticated measurements) the GR prediction is wrong ''by more than the margin of error''.  None of your comments above address the margin of error, which must be the scientific focus.  A difference between theory and observation is not "ridiculously small" if it is more than the margin of error, as in this case.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:47, 14 November 2009 (EST)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, 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
126,195

edits