Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1,559 bytes added ,  19:37, February 28, 2013
Line 753: Line 753:  
Your edits to the article are neither true not verifiable, as you have demonstrated here on the talk page: you have never given a cconvincing mathematical or physical argument for you position. May I remind you of [[#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft¹ and Walton]]? Those are not the only questions you have dodged - every time a discussion on this talk-page isn't about politics, but hard science, you chose to ignore it! Frankly, I came to the conclusion that you are not able to answer such basic questions on physics - and therefore, you shouldn't edit the article. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:27, 27 February 2013 (EST)
 
Your edits to the article are neither true not verifiable, as you have demonstrated here on the talk page: you have never given a cconvincing mathematical or physical argument for you position. May I remind you of [[#A few questions for Aschlafly regarding the experiment of Cockcroft¹ and Walton]]? Those are not the only questions you have dodged - every time a discussion on this talk-page isn't about politics, but hard science, you chose to ignore it! Frankly, I came to the conclusion that you are not able to answer such basic questions on physics - and therefore, you shouldn't edit the article. --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 04:27, 27 February 2013 (EST)
 
:Yikes AugustO, enough is enough surely.  You have to know by now that the article will never change and  yet you keep on and on.  Rest assured that virtually everyone except Andy agrees with you and let that be enough.  --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 04:44, 27 February 2013 (EST)
 
:Yikes AugustO, enough is enough surely.  You have to know by now that the article will never change and  yet you keep on and on.  Rest assured that virtually everyone except Andy agrees with you and let that be enough.  --[[User:DamianJohn|DamianJohn]] 04:44, 27 February 2013 (EST)
 +
::Andrew Schlafly, you undid my edit to [[E=mc²]], claiming that you were ''restoring information''. But even you must have seen that the restored section titled '''[http://www.jonathangrey.co.uk/emc2-doesnt-compute/ E=mc<sup>2</sup>Doesn’t Compute]''' is utter nonsense. It states:
 +
::::{|class="wikitable" style="background:grey"
 +
|''[http://www.jonathangrey.co.uk/emc2-doesnt-compute/ E=mc<sup>2</sup> Doesn’t Compute] because the quantities assigned to units of measurement (seconds, kilometres and kilograms), were randomly chosen by humans and thus cannot validate the tangible energy of a given mass designed in nature. '''Because random values cannot validate the tangible''', the result of E=mc<sup>2</sup> is abstract and so meaningless. [http://www.jonathangrey.co.uk/emc2-doesnt-compute/ E=mc<sup>2</sup> Doesn’t Compute] by [http://www.jonathangrey.co.uk/emc2-doesnt-compute/Jonathan Grey]:
 +
|}
 +
::The reasoning behind this thought is very poor (see [[Talk:E%3Dmc%C2%B2#Another kind of nonsense: User:Gryfin's contribution|here]]), and the whole section is an attempt on link-farming.
 +
 +
::As for you original contributions: I came to the conviction that you don't defend them at the talk-page as they cannot be substantiated in any way. So they only resort (instead of arguing their physical or mathematical merits) is to crowbar them into the article via your edit war - a war you'll win not by having the better arguments, but by abusing your powers. In my opinion that is very sad... --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 14:37, 28 February 2013 (EST)
Block, SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit, rollback
5,023

edits

Navigation menu