Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- From: George Hammond <Nowhere1@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:32:40 GMT
On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 04:27:53 -0700 (PDT), Eric Gisse
<jowr.pi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jul 14, 1:02 am, mluttg...@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:[Hammond]
[Luttgens]
Why is SR still controversial?
[Eric Gisse]
It isn't. The scientific community accepted SR decades ago.
Correct Eric!
[Hammond]
[Eric Gisse]
Don't confuse people who don't understand relativity [you] for the
existence of an actual controversy.
Correct again Eric!
[Hammond]
The reason it is "controversial" is because Relativity is
the root scientific mechanism of the common perceptual
phenomena known as "God" (Hammond 2003).
The "controversy" arises because the defenders of
Relativity DON'T HAVE A CLUE that this is so, while the
adversaries of Relativity are hysterical least their worst
fears be realized...... which turns out to be the case.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- From: Burger
- Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- References:
- Why is SR still controversial?
- From: mluttgens
- Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- From: Eric Gisse
- Why is SR still controversial?
- Prev by Date: Re: massless or massive photon?
- Next by Date: Re: Are *observed* SR effects real?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- Next by thread: Re: Why is SR still controversial?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading