Changes

Talk:Counterexamples to Relativity (view source)

Revision as of 18:27, August 16, 2011

601 bytes added , 18:27, August 16, 2011

→‎Attempt at Helping the Consnesus Along: That alone is telling: if Relativity were true, then there would not be the need for it to be propped up by political pressure.

Line 608: Line 608:

:::::Jim, the standard cosmological model is not safe from being falsified (however, which theory is?), and the are a lot of competiting models (like yours). This page is not meant to describe the problems of the current cosmological model, but to discredit relativity ''in toto'', and who wrote this page clearly does not know anything about relativity. I think that a new page with "open problems in cosmology" or "open problems in physics" would be warmly welcome, but must be written by some expert in the field. --[[User:MM87|<font color="#E56717">'''MM'''</font>]]''[[User_talk:MM87|<font color="#FBB117">'''''87'''''</font>]] 09:17, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

+

::::::Relativity is a mathematically complete system that is either true or false ''in toto''. Pretending that Relativity can be true despite a counterexample against it is like saying that a number can be partially prime.

+

::::::The problem, of course, is that no one who wants tenure, a Nobel Prize, or even self-esteem within the liberal university system dare admit that Relativity might not be true. That alone is telling: if Relativity were true, then there would not be the need for it to be propped up by political pressure.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:27, 16 August 2011 (EDT)

Aschlafly

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

126,644

edits