Re: Is it theory A or theory B?

Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoor...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
varistor <w89q5o...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoor...@ThankS-NO-
SperM.hotmail.com> wrote:
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Is it theory A or theory B?

Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
Copy of the reply from PD that you received
and ignored earlier:

| > What is the science for SR and LET?
. . . . .

varistor <w89q5o...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote to Dirk Vdm:
you still dident learned that it is forbidden ta make
copies of intellectual property and copyright materials

O'Barr comments:
I am the least on this net, and there are no copyrights
on what I produce on this net on the specific subject of
SR and LET. What is good enough for me is that there are
more than adequate public records being made that makes it
clear as to what was said and by whom on every point I
have made.


Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
Is it cowardice or stupidity that keeps you
from saying something
to every point PD made in his reply to
your previous rant?

O'Barr comments:
I am sure it must be something.
Maybe because this is not the thread
that was used! Did you not observe this
simple fact? Why should I answer anyone
when it is not even the right thread?
And if I recall correctly, he did
get an answer. Didn't you observer that
someone did answer him?
And if you really think he is in need
of an answer, why didn't you answer him?
Surely you are as capable as I am to
answer his questions.
So why should I do it?
And if you care about such
things, why don't you simply speak up
for yourself? Are you now afraid to
say what SR experts have been saying
for all these years?

But it really is a good thing that
we care about others. Maybe I will
think about what you have said. I
would hate to miss an opportunity of
helping someone.

Thanks for reading.
Gerald L. O'Barr <globarr...@xxxxxxxxx>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: SR fundamental contradiction
    ... Dirk Van de moortel wrote: ... distances to the end points simultaneously. ... so dt for the measuring events doesn't matter. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR fundamental contradiction
    ... Dirk Van de moortel wrote: ... This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR fundamental contradiction
    ... Dirk Van de moortel wrote: ... This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame. ... distances to the end points simultaneously. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR fundamental contradiction
    ... Dirk Van de moortel wrote: ... This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR fundamental contradiction
    ... Dirk Van de moortel wrote: ... This is a distance of the event E in the S' frame. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)