Re: Unbiased Spectroscopic Data Prove QED is Inaccurate

On Jul 22, 8:45 pm, "Steve Bell" <sb...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Once again, you are being derisive when you say "and you think you can
neglect this" which is not a question, but a statement implying I am some
kind of idiot if I do think I can neglect this.

For someone who has outright call me as much, you read a lot into
legitimate questions.


I certainly do not think I
am neglecting it.

Well according to your original post you have, where none of these
affects were taking into account, but you stilled claimed QED is wrong
even though you have neglected the energy level splittings having the
the same order of magnitude as the claimed failure.

kp




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Scottish National Languages.
    ... And from a Uni' that doesn't even exist, you neglect to mention. ... ROFL ... That was a scs classic from the resident ng idiot right enough. ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
  • Re: Float comparison
    ... and all I said is that we can neglect ex*ey, since its magnitude is ... but recommended ignoring the term in ex*ey. ... Note the sum and the product. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
Quantcast