Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Python <python@invalid.org>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Approximately 300,000 km/s With Respect To What?
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 12:40:35 +0200
Organization: CCCP
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <v7ioj3$101u$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v6pdg9$2k01g$1@dont-email.me> <lfer0bF3dlmU1@mid.individual.net>
 <v708nu$3mln$1@dont-email.me> <lfjtovFqneaU1@mid.individual.net>
 <v72oo9$ko8j$1@dont-email.me> <lfmlkfF7umpU10@mid.individual.net>
 <v786b8$1psia$1@dont-email.me> <lfrqhlF22urU3@mid.individual.net>
 <E89td6du78wfm2OXKZAD6KQeYyY@jntp> <lfut2kFfohpU9@mid.individual.net>
 <rp2ObOnNm5Uis6lq153gZKZa-KM@jntp> <lg13i1Fq3poU8@mid.individual.net>
 <v7ggcp$3hi7e$3@dont-email.me> <lg3q51F8fpmU6@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2024 12:40:35 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="35d0bd3ea667de884b41d694b5eeb47e";
	logging-data="32830"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Db4J5eLxkrQx0uIuV8Sw0"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YOqkrmtfFddTN4RbSmoVQOp7xoc=
In-Reply-To: <lg3q51F8fpmU6@mid.individual.net>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2830

Le 21/07/2024 à 09:03, Thomas Heger a écrit :
> Am Samstag000020, 20.07.2024 um 16:08 schrieb Python:
> ...
>>> The number of errors in einstein's paper is also extremely large, 
>>> hence that 'system' would need permanent control over large parts of 
>>> science.
>>>
>>> Also a mechanism for sanctions against dissidents would be useful.
>>>
>>> But for what reasons would any system take such an amount of efforts???
>>>
>>> Certainly something not very beneficial, because otherwise we would 
>>> be told about it.
>>
>> Even as fond you are to pathetically stupid "theories" (growing Earth,
>> Hitler is a British spy, etc.) you seem to realize, somewhat, how
>> stupid your claims are?
>>
>> There is a far simpler way to explain everything
>> - There are no significant mistakes in Einstein's article
> 
> This is actually a counterfactual 'sanction'!
> 
> You didn't even mention my 'annotated version of SRT' and the 400+ 
> errors I have found in Einstein's paper.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RkhX-B5u7X4ga0QH-C53RddjQGctZVdo/view
> 
> If you think, that I made 400+ errors myself, than please show at least 
> a single one.

Come on, Thomas. A lot of yours claims there has been extensively
debunked here, by me and others.

That you are such a demented stubborn imbecile who refuses to admit it
does not change anything.