Changes

:No idea?  Perhaps, just ''perhaps'' you should read the ''ample discussion of these very matters sitting above on this very page.'' [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 17:14, 23 November 2009 (EST)

:No idea?  Perhaps, just ''perhaps'' you should read the ''ample discussion of these very matters sitting above on this very page.'' [[User:DouglasA|DouglasA]] 17:14, 23 November 2009 (EST)

Your sarcasm is noted Douglas, and let me add mine. I've reviewed some of this now and to be quite frank this is a titanic monument of hogwash. It's rather embarrassing that this is on Conservapedia. The discussion above demonstrates that a lot of people here don't know what they are talking about. Several physics people tried to give explanations and show you what was wrong, but you seemed to dismiss there arguments.  

::Your sarcasm is noted Douglas, and let me add mine. I've reviewed some of this now and to be quite frank this is a titanic monument of hogwash. It's rather embarrassing that this is on Conservapedia. The discussion above demonstrates that a lot of people here don't know what they are talking about. Several physics people tried to give explanations and show you what was wrong, but you seemed to dismiss there arguments.  

Let me point out a few problems here:

Let me point out a few problems here:

Thirdly, there is massive evidence for relativity. The best example would be in particle accelerators. Most subatomic particles decay in a fraction of a second. They are able to keep them alive however for many many seconds to do experiments by accelerating them close to the speed of light and thereby exploiting time dilation. The particles age at a much slower rate from the perspective of the outside reference frame and thus we are able to experiment on them.

Thirdly, there is massive evidence for relativity. The best example would be in particle accelerators. Most subatomic particles decay in a fraction of a second. They are able to keep them alive however for many many seconds to do experiments by accelerating them close to the speed of light and thereby exploiting time dilation. The particles age at a much slower rate from the perspective of the outside reference frame and thus we are able to experiment on them.

Your tone was rather rude before. My major is physics and I've taken a grad level course in relativity, and no offense but I strongly suspect you simply don't know what you are talking about. We'll see though. ----[[User:jfraatz|Johanan Raatz]]

Your tone was rather rude before. My major is physics and I've taken a grad level course in relativity, and no offense but I strongly suspect you simply don't know what you are talking about. We'll see though. --[[User:jfraatz|Johanan Raatz]]

:Relativity predicts absurd physical discontinuities and it contradicts logic, the evidence, and the Bible.  The biggest promoters of relativity today are more liberal than the Democratic Party, and that's saying a lot.  Promoting relativity causes a great deal of harm in how people view the world, and has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars on fruitless projects like LIGO.   

:Relativity predicts absurd physical discontinuities and it contradicts logic, the evidence, and the Bible.  The biggest promoters of relativity today are more liberal than the Democratic Party, and that's saying a lot.  Promoting relativity causes a great deal of harm in how people view the world, and has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars on fruitless projects like LIGO.   

:You've heard none of this before because liberals control universities and don't allow open discussion and debate about their pet theories.  Perhaps you think man-made global warming is not a liberal theory either?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:20, 23 November 2009 (EST)

:You've heard none of this before because liberals control universities and don't allow open discussion and debate about their pet theories.  Perhaps you think man-made global warming is not a liberal theory either?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:20, 23 November 2009 (EST)