Re: Fraud in Experimental and Theoretical Science


"Greg Neill" <gneillREM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ooPHf.3211$T35.112602@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| "Spaceman" <Realspace@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| news:Ouidndl95M-vKnLenZ2dnUVZ_v6dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| >
| > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > news:1139783048.394322.265960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > |
| > | Spaceman wrote:
| > | > "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
| > | > news:1139777673.296013.195540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| > | > | Just like Seto, Wilson, and spaceman, you simply don't know how to
| > | > | measure the length of a moving object or what requirements go into
| > that
| > | > | measurement.
| > | >
| > | > PD,
| > | > If you use such bad logic as
| > | > a length = a speed (such as the definition of the meter now)
| > |
| > | Nonsense, the definition of a meter is not a speed.
| >
| > Bull***!
| > It is defined as the length of the path travelled by light in absolute
| > vacuum during a time interval of 1/299,792,458 of a second.
|
| Well there you go. You said it yourself: it's a length.

no,
Try reading the whole thing,
It is a length traveled at a certain amount of time (speed)


|
| >
| > (it is a "speed")
| > You are incorrect by 100%.
|
| You're not even wrong, which is a pretty remarkable
| thing to be so consistently.

Your "not even wrong" is not even wrong.
You are stuck in rubber ruler land where a meter is a speed.
And you are so brainwashed in such a land, you can not
even grasp how stupid your rubber ruler standard is.
LOL


.

Quantcast