Re: Are there any civil anti-relativists?

"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:f6daf1eb-4fb0-4006-87e9-ae758238f79b@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 2, 3:38 pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:3d047018-b027-432a-af06-99a78a6e1834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Feb 1, 5:05 pm, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwi...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:79c8c68b-c3b0-4b2d-a602-2172f93540ff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Feb 1, 4:39 am, "Jeckyl" <no...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well, as I said, when I was making errors, about half of the posts
in
this newsgroup were directed at me. Now that I have defined t'=t,
no
one wants to talk.

There is nothing more to say .. your self-contradictory theory is as
self-contradictory as it always was.

Well, one would have to wonder why you are so reluctant to show what
you claim is contradiction.

I have shown in many many times .. so it is clear I shows no reluctance
in
doing so . .ther eis simply no point in redoing it again, simply because
you
have the gall to start posting your nonsense in a physics group again

[snip the same crap as before]

Can't refute t'=t, huh, Jeckyl?

Of course I can and I have.

[snip more crap and nonsense from idiot rbwinn]


.

Relevant Pages