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
125,797
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 618:
Line 618: − +
Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)
Revision as of 19:24, August 16, 2011
, 19:24, August 16, 2011grammar
:::::::: That's not true about Newtonian mechanics. Its exponents can be tweaked and its equations revised based on observation. Not so for Relativity.
:::::::: That's not true about Newtonian mechanics. Its exponents can be tweaked and its equations revised based on observation. Not so for Relativity.
:::::::: Liberals already teach that Newtonian mechanics is fundamentally incorrect, so there is little reason to add that (often false) criticism. In contrast, liberals insist that Relativity must be true and they punish anyone who dares claim otherwise. That needs to be challenged, but don't expect anyone who is a university grad student or professor wannabee to dare to do so. His career will be over if he utters any criticism of Relativity.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:20, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
:::::::: Liberals already teach that Newtonian mechanics is fundamentally incorrect, so there is little reason to add to that (often false) criticism. In contrast, liberals insist that Relativity must be true and they punish anyone who dares claim otherwise. That needs to be challenged, but don't expect anyone who is a university grad student or professor wannabee to dare to do so. His career will be over if he utters any criticism of Relativity.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 15:20, 16 August 2011 (EDT)