Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
+7
Realearth
csp
Schpankme
Themis
George Tirebiter
Admin
Thinkforyourself
11 posters
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Heliocentricity, Geocentricity, Cosmology and Cosmogeny
Page 1 of 2
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2 
Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:16 pm
Posted by conscioustruth on 03/29/2015
Hi everyone - I have made a video that clearly proves that Einstein's theory of time dilation is wrong.
Please take a look:
Hi everyone - I have made a video that clearly proves that Einstein's theory of time dilation is wrong.
Please take a look:
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:17 pm
Posted by thinkforyourself on 03/29/2015
Good job!
Einstein is a complete fraud in any case. The theories are nonsense, but he didn't even come up with them in the first place:
webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en-GB&q=cache:xTrEyWpgj8YJ:http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/nov/11/rorycarroll%2Beinstein+was+italians+idea&gbv=2&&ct=clnk
www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm
Good job!
Einstein is a complete fraud in any case. The theories are nonsense, but he didn't even come up with them in the first place:
webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en-GB&q=cache:xTrEyWpgj8YJ:http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/nov/11/rorycarroll%2Beinstein+was+italians+idea&gbv=2&&ct=clnk
www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_einstein.htm
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:17 pm
Posted by Admin on 03/31/2015
Around the turn of the 20th century, in order to save the dying heliocentric model from the conclusive experiments of Airy, Michelson, Morley, Gale, Sagnac, Kantor, Nordmeyer and others, Albert Einstein created his Special Theory of Relativity, a brilliant revision of heliocentricism which in one philosophical swoop banished the universal aether from scientific study replacing it with a form of relativism which allowed for heliocentricism and geocentricism to hold equal merit. If there is no absolute aetheric medium within which all things exist, then hypothetically one can postulate complete relativism with regard to the movement of two objects, such as the Earth and Sun. At the time, the Michelson-Morley and Michelson-Gale experiments had already long measured and proven the existence of the aether, but the church of heliocentricism was not to be deterred, Einstein never tried to refute the experiments scientifically, choosing instead to object philosophically with his notion of “absolute relativity,” claiming that all uniform motion is relative and there exists no absolute state of rest anywhere in the universe. Nowadays, just like the theory of heliocentricism, Einstein’s theory of relativity is accepted worldwide as gospel truth, even though he himself admitted geocentricism is equally justifiable:
“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.” -Albert Einstein
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” -George Ellis, “Thinking Globally, Acting Universally”
Einstein’s necessary modification to the heliocentric theory ultimately resulted in transforming it into the “acentric” theory of the universe, because the Sun was no longer the center of anything, and all motion was only relative. Acentrists soon began postulating that not only is the Earth spinning 1,000 mph and revolving 67,000 mph around the Sun, but the Earth, Sun and entire solar system as a whole are simultaneously rotating around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 mph! Furthermore, the entire galaxy, with the Earth, Sun and entire solar system, are also simultaneously shooting 670,000,000 mph through the universe away from a Big Bang explosion at the beginning of time!
“The theory of the three [now four] motions of the Earth and subsequent ‘relativity,’ is the result of trying to cover up one lie by another. They say that as we whirl in London at the rate of nearly eleven miles a minute, we are shooting into space around the Sun at nearly twenty miles a second, and the Sun itself moves around a point in space, at the immense speed of 150,000,000 miles in a year, pulling our poor Earth with him at the added speed - the distance that separates us from the Sun - and in this maddening whirlwind of motions they try to apply Euclid’s spherical trigonometry to locate distances - which data was intended by Euclid to determine fixed points only - with the result that they have brought out wild calculations which have been fostered dogmatically on a gullible World, but are about as infallible as the utterances of Borgia.” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (7)
“Most people who accept that the Earth is in motion believe it is a proven fact. They do not realize that not only has the motion of the Earth never been proven, but by the constructs of modern physics and cosmology cannot be proven. Again, even modern cosmology does not claim to be able to prove that the Earth is in motion. In fact the very best argument for Earth’s motion is based on pure ‘modesty’ not logic, observation and experience. If anyone could prove the Earth’s motion, that someone would become more famous than Einstein, Hawking and others. They may all be fools but even they would not make such an ignorant claim to proof of Earth’s motions, and those who do so don’t realize just how ignorant of physics they really are! Before folks go demonstrating how ignorant they are, they should consider: 1. The relationship between Mach’s principle and relativity. 2. The relationship between Gravity and Inertia, and Gravity and Acceleration (and the paradoxes that exist). 3. Relativity does not claim to prove Earth’s motions, in fact it ‘dictates’ the ridiculous idea that motion cannot be proven period. 4. Relativity proposes motion, it does not nor can it claim to disprove that the Earth is the center of the universe! 5. Only those who are ignorant of physics attempt to make arguments based on weather patterns, ballistic trajectories, geosynchronous satellites, and Foucault’s pendulums for evidence of Earth’s motions! For all those ‘geniuses’ out there, not even Einstein would claim such stupidity.” -Allen Daves
When Einstein first introduced his theory of relativity to the world, he often used the analogy of a wagon rolling along the street as an illustration. “What we mean by relative motion,” he stated in a Princeton University lecture, “in a general sense is perfectly plain to everyone. If we think of a wagon moving along a street we know that it is possible to speak of the wagon at rest, and the street in motion, just as well as it is to speak of the wagon in motion and the street at rest. That, however, is a very special part of the ideas involved in the principle of Relativity.”
“That would be amusing if we read it in a comic paper, but when Professor Einstein says it in a lecture at the Princeton University, we are expected not to laugh; that is the only difference. It is silly, but I may not dismiss the matter with that remark, and so I will answer quite seriously that it is only possible for me to speak of the street moving while the wagon remains still - and to believe it - when I cast away all the experience of a lifetime and am no longer able to understand the evidence of my senses; which is insanity … Such self-deception as this is not reasoning; it is the negation of reason; which is the faculty of forming correct conclusions from things observed, judged by the light of experience. It is unworthy of our intelligence and a waste of our greatest gift; but that introduction serves very well to illustrate the kind of illusion that lies at the root of Relativity. When he suggested that the street might be moving while the wagon with its wheels revolving was standing still, he was asking us to imagine that in a similar manner the earth we stand upon might be moving while the stars that pass in the night stand still. It is a Case of Appeal, where Einstein appeals in the name of a convicted Copernican Astronomy against the judgment of Michelson - Morley, Nordmeyer, physics, fact, experience, observation and reason.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65-66)
On the surface relativity may seem plausible enough, especially when presented by a charismatic character of Einstein’s caliber, but is it really so simple and straight-forward? In fact Einstein’s theory of relativity is so complicated and convoluted that when it first came to the public’s attention, it was said that there were probably less than a dozen people on Earth capable of understanding it! After Einstein presented his theory to the Royal Astronomical Society, philanthropist Eugene Higgins offered a prize of $5,000 for the best explanation of relativity, in essay form, describing it so the general public could understand what it was all about. Prize winner Mr. L. Bolton himself admitted that “even when stated in its simplest form, it remains a tough proposition.”
Along with Einstein’s denial of the aether and anything absolute (except the absoluteness of relativity), he had to create a litany of new terms and ideas, each depending upon another and contributing to support the whole. For example, Einstein claimed there was no aether, that time is a fourth spacial dimension, that “infinity” and “eternity” do not exist, and that light is a material thing. This meant that time must be added to the three dimensions of length, breadth, and thickness, that “space” be renamed a “continuum,” and “points” in the “space-time continuum” be renamed to “events.”
“What we have always known as a ‘point’ in the terms of Euclid, Einstein calls an ‘event!’ but if words have any meaning a point and an event are two totally different things; for a point is a mark, a spot or place, and is only concerned in the consideration of material things; while an event is an occurrence, it is something that happens. There is as much difference between them as there is between the sentence ‘This is a barrel of apples,’ and ‘These apples came from New Zealand.’ While claiming ‘time’ as a fourth dimension, Einstein explains that ‘by dimension we must understand merely one of four independent quantities which locate an event in space.’ This is to imply that the other three dimensions which are in common use are independent quantities, which is not the case; for length, breadth and thickness are essentially found in combination; they co-exist in each and every physical thing, so that they are related - hence they are not independent quantities. On the contrary, time IS an independent quantity. It is independent of any one, or all, the three proportions of material things, it is not in any way related; and therefore cannot be used as a fourth dimension.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (69-70)
Einstein’s theory of relativity claims that light is a material thing which therefore has weight and is subject to gravity. This idea meant starlight could now bend under its own weight and curve its path based on the distance and mass of objects along its trajectory, which allowed heliocentrists like Einstein to claim stars are in reality not where they appear to be, and that with this new geometry the stars must be moved to much farther away than previously assumed.
“Consequently the heavenly bodies may be much further away than they have hitherto been supposed to be, and every method which is based upon the geometry of Euclid and the triangulation of Hipparchus will fail to discover the distance to a star; because its real position is no longer known. Wherefore Einstein has invented a new kind of geometry, in order to calculate the positions of the stars by what is nothing more or less than metaphysics.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (66-67)
Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” states that light always travels at the same speed, 186,414 miles per second (671,090,400 miles per hour), but Einstein also claims that gravity causes light to bend towards massive objects along its trajectory. If a ray of light can be said to bend, curve, or deviate from its course due to the gravitational pull of masses in its path, it must by necessity accelerate when approaching and decelerate when receding from these things. However, if light can bend under its own weight, or under the law of gravitation, as Einstein claims it does, than it is not and cannot be absolute.
“Strangely enough, while Einstein claims that everything is in motion and nothing is stable, he allows one thing, and one thing only, to remain outside the realm of relativity, independent of everything else; He claims that the velocity of light is constant under all circumstances, and therefore is absolute. This is a blunder of the first magnitude, but I do not imagine that he fell into it through any oversight; for it is quite evident that he was driven into this false position. He was compelled to say that the velocity of light is constant, because, if he did not his new geometry would be useless … We are told that light is a material thing, and that a beam of light is deflected from a straight line by the gravitation of any and every thing that lies near its course as it passes within their sphere of influence; and we are further assured that light always maintains a uniform speed of 186,414 miles a second. We have, however, to remind Professor Einstein that this was determined as the result of experiments by the physicists - Fizeau, Foucalt, Cornu, Michelson, and Newcomb, all of which experiments were conducted within the earth’s atmosphere, on terra-firma. In all these experiments a ray of light was reflected between two mirrors several miles apart, so that it had to pass to and fro always through the atmosphere, and it is not to be supposed that light, or anything else, can travel at the same speed through the air as it would through the vacuum Einstein supposes space to be. Let us reverse this in order to realize it better. It is not to be supposed that any material thing travels at no greater speed through a vacuum than it does through air, which has a certain amount of density or opacity. If anything does not distinguish the difference between air and a vacuum, then it is not a material thing; it cannot be matter. On the other hand, anything that is matter must of necessity make such a distinction, and in that case its velocity cannot be constant.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (70)
Conventional wisdom before Einstein’s theory was that light was not a material thing, that it discharged in a straight line in every direction from the source, that it could not be influenced by gravity, could not bend, curve, or be deflected from its course by anything; As Lord Kelvin said, “Light diverges from a luminous center outwards in all directions.” Its velocity may be affected according to the density of the medium through which it passes, but this fact simply proves Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” is incorrect.
“The length of the course used by Newcomb in the final determination of the Velocity of Light was 7.44242 kilometers. If the ray of light had deviated by a hair’s-breadth from an absolutely straight line, it never could have passed through the interstices between the very fine teeth of his revolving wheel, or return precisely to the appointed spot on his sending and receiving mirrors, which were 3.72121 kilometers apart. The fact that the ray of light did pass from mirror to mirror, and through the wheel, proves that it maintained a straight line; hence it is certain that it was not deflected from its course by the gravitation of the earth between the two mirrors; wherefore it is obvious that it was not affected by gravitation. So we find that the very experiments by which the accepted 186,414 miles per second as the Velocity of Light was measured - experiments which were carried out with the utmost painstaking and minute attention to detail - prove that a ray of light is not influenced by the gravitation of the earth in the slightest degree. Therefore, if those experiments were good enough to warrant all the world in accepting the ‘Velocity of Light’ they may be equally well adduced as proof that a ray of light does not bend by its own weight; and that light is not affected by gravitation.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (71)
"As for Einstein, if you want to believe that lengths shrink when an object moves, time changes in the process, and its mass increases, just so you can explain the anomalies of Michelson's experiment, that's your privilege, but I'd just as soon answer it by saying that mass, time and length stay the same and the Earth isn't moving, and I'm just as 'scientific' as you for saying so." -Robert Sungenis
“Relativity is clever; but it belongs to the same category as Newton’s Law of Gravitation and the Kant-Herschell-Laplace Nebular Hypothesis, in as far as it is a superfine effort of the imagination seeking to maintain an impossible theory of the universe in defiance of every fact against it.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65)
Around the turn of the 20th century, in order to save the dying heliocentric model from the conclusive experiments of Airy, Michelson, Morley, Gale, Sagnac, Kantor, Nordmeyer and others, Albert Einstein created his Special Theory of Relativity, a brilliant revision of heliocentricism which in one philosophical swoop banished the universal aether from scientific study replacing it with a form of relativism which allowed for heliocentricism and geocentricism to hold equal merit. If there is no absolute aetheric medium within which all things exist, then hypothetically one can postulate complete relativism with regard to the movement of two objects, such as the Earth and Sun. At the time, the Michelson-Morley and Michelson-Gale experiments had already long measured and proven the existence of the aether, but the church of heliocentricism was not to be deterred, Einstein never tried to refute the experiments scientifically, choosing instead to object philosophically with his notion of “absolute relativity,” claiming that all uniform motion is relative and there exists no absolute state of rest anywhere in the universe. Nowadays, just like the theory of heliocentricism, Einstein’s theory of relativity is accepted worldwide as gospel truth, even though he himself admitted geocentricism is equally justifiable:
“The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the earth moves,' or 'the sun moves and the earth is at rest,' would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems.” -Albert Einstein
“People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations. For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its center, and you cannot disprove it based on observations. You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that.” -George Ellis, “Thinking Globally, Acting Universally”
Einstein’s necessary modification to the heliocentric theory ultimately resulted in transforming it into the “acentric” theory of the universe, because the Sun was no longer the center of anything, and all motion was only relative. Acentrists soon began postulating that not only is the Earth spinning 1,000 mph and revolving 67,000 mph around the Sun, but the Earth, Sun and entire solar system as a whole are simultaneously rotating around the Milky Way galaxy at 500,000 mph! Furthermore, the entire galaxy, with the Earth, Sun and entire solar system, are also simultaneously shooting 670,000,000 mph through the universe away from a Big Bang explosion at the beginning of time!
“The theory of the three [now four] motions of the Earth and subsequent ‘relativity,’ is the result of trying to cover up one lie by another. They say that as we whirl in London at the rate of nearly eleven miles a minute, we are shooting into space around the Sun at nearly twenty miles a second, and the Sun itself moves around a point in space, at the immense speed of 150,000,000 miles in a year, pulling our poor Earth with him at the added speed - the distance that separates us from the Sun - and in this maddening whirlwind of motions they try to apply Euclid’s spherical trigonometry to locate distances - which data was intended by Euclid to determine fixed points only - with the result that they have brought out wild calculations which have been fostered dogmatically on a gullible World, but are about as infallible as the utterances of Borgia.” -E. Eschini, “Foundations of Many Generations” (7)
“Most people who accept that the Earth is in motion believe it is a proven fact. They do not realize that not only has the motion of the Earth never been proven, but by the constructs of modern physics and cosmology cannot be proven. Again, even modern cosmology does not claim to be able to prove that the Earth is in motion. In fact the very best argument for Earth’s motion is based on pure ‘modesty’ not logic, observation and experience. If anyone could prove the Earth’s motion, that someone would become more famous than Einstein, Hawking and others. They may all be fools but even they would not make such an ignorant claim to proof of Earth’s motions, and those who do so don’t realize just how ignorant of physics they really are! Before folks go demonstrating how ignorant they are, they should consider: 1. The relationship between Mach’s principle and relativity. 2. The relationship between Gravity and Inertia, and Gravity and Acceleration (and the paradoxes that exist). 3. Relativity does not claim to prove Earth’s motions, in fact it ‘dictates’ the ridiculous idea that motion cannot be proven period. 4. Relativity proposes motion, it does not nor can it claim to disprove that the Earth is the center of the universe! 5. Only those who are ignorant of physics attempt to make arguments based on weather patterns, ballistic trajectories, geosynchronous satellites, and Foucault’s pendulums for evidence of Earth’s motions! For all those ‘geniuses’ out there, not even Einstein would claim such stupidity.” -Allen Daves
When Einstein first introduced his theory of relativity to the world, he often used the analogy of a wagon rolling along the street as an illustration. “What we mean by relative motion,” he stated in a Princeton University lecture, “in a general sense is perfectly plain to everyone. If we think of a wagon moving along a street we know that it is possible to speak of the wagon at rest, and the street in motion, just as well as it is to speak of the wagon in motion and the street at rest. That, however, is a very special part of the ideas involved in the principle of Relativity.”
“That would be amusing if we read it in a comic paper, but when Professor Einstein says it in a lecture at the Princeton University, we are expected not to laugh; that is the only difference. It is silly, but I may not dismiss the matter with that remark, and so I will answer quite seriously that it is only possible for me to speak of the street moving while the wagon remains still - and to believe it - when I cast away all the experience of a lifetime and am no longer able to understand the evidence of my senses; which is insanity … Such self-deception as this is not reasoning; it is the negation of reason; which is the faculty of forming correct conclusions from things observed, judged by the light of experience. It is unworthy of our intelligence and a waste of our greatest gift; but that introduction serves very well to illustrate the kind of illusion that lies at the root of Relativity. When he suggested that the street might be moving while the wagon with its wheels revolving was standing still, he was asking us to imagine that in a similar manner the earth we stand upon might be moving while the stars that pass in the night stand still. It is a Case of Appeal, where Einstein appeals in the name of a convicted Copernican Astronomy against the judgment of Michelson - Morley, Nordmeyer, physics, fact, experience, observation and reason.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65-66)
On the surface relativity may seem plausible enough, especially when presented by a charismatic character of Einstein’s caliber, but is it really so simple and straight-forward? In fact Einstein’s theory of relativity is so complicated and convoluted that when it first came to the public’s attention, it was said that there were probably less than a dozen people on Earth capable of understanding it! After Einstein presented his theory to the Royal Astronomical Society, philanthropist Eugene Higgins offered a prize of $5,000 for the best explanation of relativity, in essay form, describing it so the general public could understand what it was all about. Prize winner Mr. L. Bolton himself admitted that “even when stated in its simplest form, it remains a tough proposition.”
Along with Einstein’s denial of the aether and anything absolute (except the absoluteness of relativity), he had to create a litany of new terms and ideas, each depending upon another and contributing to support the whole. For example, Einstein claimed there was no aether, that time is a fourth spacial dimension, that “infinity” and “eternity” do not exist, and that light is a material thing. This meant that time must be added to the three dimensions of length, breadth, and thickness, that “space” be renamed a “continuum,” and “points” in the “space-time continuum” be renamed to “events.”
“What we have always known as a ‘point’ in the terms of Euclid, Einstein calls an ‘event!’ but if words have any meaning a point and an event are two totally different things; for a point is a mark, a spot or place, and is only concerned in the consideration of material things; while an event is an occurrence, it is something that happens. There is as much difference between them as there is between the sentence ‘This is a barrel of apples,’ and ‘These apples came from New Zealand.’ While claiming ‘time’ as a fourth dimension, Einstein explains that ‘by dimension we must understand merely one of four independent quantities which locate an event in space.’ This is to imply that the other three dimensions which are in common use are independent quantities, which is not the case; for length, breadth and thickness are essentially found in combination; they co-exist in each and every physical thing, so that they are related - hence they are not independent quantities. On the contrary, time IS an independent quantity. It is independent of any one, or all, the three proportions of material things, it is not in any way related; and therefore cannot be used as a fourth dimension.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (69-70)
Einstein’s theory of relativity claims that light is a material thing which therefore has weight and is subject to gravity. This idea meant starlight could now bend under its own weight and curve its path based on the distance and mass of objects along its trajectory, which allowed heliocentrists like Einstein to claim stars are in reality not where they appear to be, and that with this new geometry the stars must be moved to much farther away than previously assumed.
“Consequently the heavenly bodies may be much further away than they have hitherto been supposed to be, and every method which is based upon the geometry of Euclid and the triangulation of Hipparchus will fail to discover the distance to a star; because its real position is no longer known. Wherefore Einstein has invented a new kind of geometry, in order to calculate the positions of the stars by what is nothing more or less than metaphysics.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (66-67)
Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” states that light always travels at the same speed, 186,414 miles per second (671,090,400 miles per hour), but Einstein also claims that gravity causes light to bend towards massive objects along its trajectory. If a ray of light can be said to bend, curve, or deviate from its course due to the gravitational pull of masses in its path, it must by necessity accelerate when approaching and decelerate when receding from these things. However, if light can bend under its own weight, or under the law of gravitation, as Einstein claims it does, than it is not and cannot be absolute.
“Strangely enough, while Einstein claims that everything is in motion and nothing is stable, he allows one thing, and one thing only, to remain outside the realm of relativity, independent of everything else; He claims that the velocity of light is constant under all circumstances, and therefore is absolute. This is a blunder of the first magnitude, but I do not imagine that he fell into it through any oversight; for it is quite evident that he was driven into this false position. He was compelled to say that the velocity of light is constant, because, if he did not his new geometry would be useless … We are told that light is a material thing, and that a beam of light is deflected from a straight line by the gravitation of any and every thing that lies near its course as it passes within their sphere of influence; and we are further assured that light always maintains a uniform speed of 186,414 miles a second. We have, however, to remind Professor Einstein that this was determined as the result of experiments by the physicists - Fizeau, Foucalt, Cornu, Michelson, and Newcomb, all of which experiments were conducted within the earth’s atmosphere, on terra-firma. In all these experiments a ray of light was reflected between two mirrors several miles apart, so that it had to pass to and fro always through the atmosphere, and it is not to be supposed that light, or anything else, can travel at the same speed through the air as it would through the vacuum Einstein supposes space to be. Let us reverse this in order to realize it better. It is not to be supposed that any material thing travels at no greater speed through a vacuum than it does through air, which has a certain amount of density or opacity. If anything does not distinguish the difference between air and a vacuum, then it is not a material thing; it cannot be matter. On the other hand, anything that is matter must of necessity make such a distinction, and in that case its velocity cannot be constant.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (70)
Conventional wisdom before Einstein’s theory was that light was not a material thing, that it discharged in a straight line in every direction from the source, that it could not be influenced by gravity, could not bend, curve, or be deflected from its course by anything; As Lord Kelvin said, “Light diverges from a luminous center outwards in all directions.” Its velocity may be affected according to the density of the medium through which it passes, but this fact simply proves Einstein’s “Law of the Constancy of the Velocity of Light” is incorrect.
“The length of the course used by Newcomb in the final determination of the Velocity of Light was 7.44242 kilometers. If the ray of light had deviated by a hair’s-breadth from an absolutely straight line, it never could have passed through the interstices between the very fine teeth of his revolving wheel, or return precisely to the appointed spot on his sending and receiving mirrors, which were 3.72121 kilometers apart. The fact that the ray of light did pass from mirror to mirror, and through the wheel, proves that it maintained a straight line; hence it is certain that it was not deflected from its course by the gravitation of the earth between the two mirrors; wherefore it is obvious that it was not affected by gravitation. So we find that the very experiments by which the accepted 186,414 miles per second as the Velocity of Light was measured - experiments which were carried out with the utmost painstaking and minute attention to detail - prove that a ray of light is not influenced by the gravitation of the earth in the slightest degree. Therefore, if those experiments were good enough to warrant all the world in accepting the ‘Velocity of Light’ they may be equally well adduced as proof that a ray of light does not bend by its own weight; and that light is not affected by gravitation.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (71)
"As for Einstein, if you want to believe that lengths shrink when an object moves, time changes in the process, and its mass increases, just so you can explain the anomalies of Michelson's experiment, that's your privilege, but I'd just as soon answer it by saying that mass, time and length stay the same and the Earth isn't moving, and I'm just as 'scientific' as you for saying so." -Robert Sungenis
“Relativity is clever; but it belongs to the same category as Newton’s Law of Gravitation and the Kant-Herschell-Laplace Nebular Hypothesis, in as far as it is a superfine effort of the imagination seeking to maintain an impossible theory of the universe in defiance of every fact against it.” -Gerrard Hickson, “Kings Dethroned” (65)
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:18 pm
Posted by eschaton on 03/31/2015
Here is what Tesla thought of Einsteins relativity theory.
"a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king..., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists..."
"I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view." Nikola Tesla
Here is what Tesla thought of Einsteins relativity theory.
"a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in purple whom ignorant people take for a king..., its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists..."
"I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties. It might as well be said that God has properties. He has not, but only attributes and these are of our own making. Of properties we can only speak when dealing with matter filling the space. To say that in the presence of large bodies space becomes curved is equivalent to stating that something can act upon nothing. I, for one, refuse to subscribe to such a view." Nikola Tesla
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:18 pm
Posted by planetruth on 04/09/2015
***
It will be remembered how Hipparchus failed to get an angle to the stars 2,000 years ago, and arrived at the conclusion that they must be infinitely distant; and we have seen how that hypothesis has been handed down to us through all the centuries without question.
~ G. Hickson ~
****
Part I, Mr. Hickson takes to task Copernicus to Newton and destroys their scientific and mathematical work as based on the most basic false assumptions.
aplanetruth.info/2015/04/06/26a-how-did-the-kings-of-astronomy-get-it-so-wrong-part-i-copernicus-newton/
Part II, How Did The Kings of Astronomy Get it So Wrong? Part II: Einstein and the Still Earth
aplanetruth.info/2015/04/07/26b-how-did-the-kings-of-astronomy-get-it-so-wrong-part-ii-einstein-and-the-still-earth/#more-793
This work by Gerrard Hickson blows the door off the errors, omissions and lies of Einstein and his peers at the Astronomical Society of England. This is a very powerful indictment and proof that the entire science of astronomy is based on false truths.
This work connects the Great Lie from the 16th Century up to the 1920’s. From there we got the private, for profit Federal Reserve in 1913, the Great Bankruptcy in 1933 and NASA started in 1958 up to today.
Onward.
This connects the 500 yr. Great Lie. Huge thanks to Mr. Eric Dubay, Mr. Samuel Rowbotham and Mr. Gerrard Hickson for doing much of the heavy lifting on this most important work.
***
It will be remembered how Hipparchus failed to get an angle to the stars 2,000 years ago, and arrived at the conclusion that they must be infinitely distant; and we have seen how that hypothesis has been handed down to us through all the centuries without question.
~ G. Hickson ~
****
Part I, Mr. Hickson takes to task Copernicus to Newton and destroys their scientific and mathematical work as based on the most basic false assumptions.
aplanetruth.info/2015/04/06/26a-how-did-the-kings-of-astronomy-get-it-so-wrong-part-i-copernicus-newton/
Part II, How Did The Kings of Astronomy Get it So Wrong? Part II: Einstein and the Still Earth
aplanetruth.info/2015/04/07/26b-how-did-the-kings-of-astronomy-get-it-so-wrong-part-ii-einstein-and-the-still-earth/#more-793
This work by Gerrard Hickson blows the door off the errors, omissions and lies of Einstein and his peers at the Astronomical Society of England. This is a very powerful indictment and proof that the entire science of astronomy is based on false truths.
This work connects the Great Lie from the 16th Century up to the 1920’s. From there we got the private, for profit Federal Reserve in 1913, the Great Bankruptcy in 1933 and NASA started in 1958 up to today.
Onward.
This connects the 500 yr. Great Lie. Huge thanks to Mr. Eric Dubay, Mr. Samuel Rowbotham and Mr. Gerrard Hickson for doing much of the heavy lifting on this most important work.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:21 pm
Posted by thinkforyourself on 04/21/2015
Not only was he a Shill, but he was also an actor. He didn't even really come up with the theories credited to him; they were stolen from several other scientists, and put together as as part of the 'Einstein' package. This is one of the many things that he stole:
www.theguardian.com/world/1999/nov/11/rorycarroll
In reality, Einstein was neither a genius, nor genuine.
Not only was he a Shill, but he was also an actor. He didn't even really come up with the theories credited to him; they were stolen from several other scientists, and put together as as part of the 'Einstein' package. This is one of the many things that he stole:
www.theguardian.com/world/1999/nov/11/rorycarroll
In reality, Einstein was neither a genius, nor genuine.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:21 pm
Posted by aysun on 07/18/2015
In reality, Einstein was neither a genius, nor genuine.
No, he was a file clerk and a very well paid actor. Why else does he stick out his tongue at us than demonstrating: haha, the joke´s on you!
In reality, Einstein was neither a genius, nor genuine.
No, he was a file clerk and a very well paid actor. Why else does he stick out his tongue at us than demonstrating: haha, the joke´s on you!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:22 pm
Posted by gnosticwarrior on 07/18/2015
Ah, this thread rules. Awesome links and information, just like in the no-dino thread. Thank you!
Ah, this thread rules. Awesome links and information, just like in the no-dino thread. Thank you!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:22 pm
Posted by cropirate on 07/19/2015
Albert Einstein, Jew and Zionist and Mastermind behind Hiroshima, honoured as The Man of the 20th century, came up with the absolute speed of light, which is wrong too. Their hole measurement of the space is based on this speed, which was never (and never will be) proved outside our atmosphere. A Russian physicist, however, noted that a laser beam that is thrown vertically upwards, in its velocity decreases, thus behaves degressively.
I think the hole science community knows this, but as always they fear to be blamed as anti-Semitic, which is a bad thing in their world.
Albert Einstein, Jew and Zionist and Mastermind behind Hiroshima, honoured as The Man of the 20th century, came up with the absolute speed of light, which is wrong too. Their hole measurement of the space is based on this speed, which was never (and never will be) proved outside our atmosphere. A Russian physicist, however, noted that a laser beam that is thrown vertically upwards, in its velocity decreases, thus behaves degressively.
I think the hole science community knows this, but as always they fear to be blamed as anti-Semitic, which is a bad thing in their world.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:22 pm
Posted by gnosticwarrior on 07/19/2015
I remember Terence McKenna once mentioning in a lecture, how it's absolutely asinine to assume that the speed of light (being measured once or twice in a lab in the early 1900's) is taken as the pinnacle of measurement.
He also went on to state how most measurements are not stable, and fluctuate up and down to a certain degree. "Scientist" round off the anomalies - which are what True Reality actually is; a constantly fluctuating standing-wave pattern - and then flatten out numbers which are actually just gross approximations, that are then taken as be-all-end-all gospel from the high priests of scientism. Materialists gonna materialize!
The anti-semite thing regarding Einstein just made a whole lot more sense to me. Can you say "bases covered"?
I remember Terence McKenna once mentioning in a lecture, how it's absolutely asinine to assume that the speed of light (being measured once or twice in a lab in the early 1900's) is taken as the pinnacle of measurement.
He also went on to state how most measurements are not stable, and fluctuate up and down to a certain degree. "Scientist" round off the anomalies - which are what True Reality actually is; a constantly fluctuating standing-wave pattern - and then flatten out numbers which are actually just gross approximations, that are then taken as be-all-end-all gospel from the high priests of scientism. Materialists gonna materialize!
The anti-semite thing regarding Einstein just made a whole lot more sense to me. Can you say "bases covered"?
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:24 pm
Posted by cropirate on 07/20/2015
The scientific activity is a magic source of power, which is used by people as a means of appropriation and authorization in the field of the mind, which is why even the diabolical reigns in her.
The atomic "genius" asked the US President Roosevelt not only by letter on 02 August 1939 (shortly before the outbreak of World War II), but also on 07 March 1940 to use the uranium bomb on devastating manner against Germany.Hitler himself stated a few times that he is against the bomb.
On a Zionist meeting in New York in 1921 Einstein spoke before tens of thousands of fellow believers: "My leader is Chaim Weizmann. Follow him. I have spoken."
The smartest men who ever lived (they opened his brain and saw it ???) and as always he is shown as the funny,silly Jew on pictures.
Everything is relative, its the point of view that matters.
The scientific activity is a magic source of power, which is used by people as a means of appropriation and authorization in the field of the mind, which is why even the diabolical reigns in her.
The atomic "genius" asked the US President Roosevelt not only by letter on 02 August 1939 (shortly before the outbreak of World War II), but also on 07 March 1940 to use the uranium bomb on devastating manner against Germany.Hitler himself stated a few times that he is against the bomb.
On a Zionist meeting in New York in 1921 Einstein spoke before tens of thousands of fellow believers: "My leader is Chaim Weizmann. Follow him. I have spoken."
The smartest men who ever lived (they opened his brain and saw it ???) and as always he is shown as the funny,silly Jew on pictures.
Everything is relative, its the point of view that matters.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:27 pm
Posted by vortexpuppy on 07/20/2015
100 Authors against Einstein.
right.orain.org/wiki/100_authors_against_Einstein
Wikipedia version of his-story
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_theory_of_relativity
Many of the critics were German. The book has never been translated.
100 Authors against Einstein.
right.orain.org/wiki/100_authors_against_Einstein
Wikipedia version of his-story
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_theory_of_relativity
Many of the critics were German. The book has never been translated.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:28 pm
Posted by bemoody on 07/21/2015
The McKenna observation reminds me of a Rupert Sheldrake lecture where he talks about how seemingly every week the figures on the 'constants of nature' used as scientific premises needed to be updated. These 'constants' wouldn't be changing depending on whatever predetermined results these scientismists were looking for before they tested, now would they? Hmmm.
Jul 19, 2015 12:45:21 GMT gnosticwarrior said:
I remember Terence McKenna once mentioning in a lecture, how it's absolutely asinine to assume that the speed of light (being measured once or twice in a lab in the early 1900's) is taken as the pinnacle of measurement.
He also went on to state how most measurements are not stable, and fluctuate up and down to a certain degree. "Scientist" round off the anomalies - which are what True Reality actually is; a constantly fluctuating standing-wave pattern - and then flatten out numbers which are actually just gross approximations, that are then taken as be-all-end-all gospel from the high priests of scientism. Materialists gonna materialize!
The anti-semite thing regarding Einstein just made a whole lot more sense to me. Can you say "bases covered"?
The McKenna observation reminds me of a Rupert Sheldrake lecture where he talks about how seemingly every week the figures on the 'constants of nature' used as scientific premises needed to be updated. These 'constants' wouldn't be changing depending on whatever predetermined results these scientismists were looking for before they tested, now would they? Hmmm.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:29 pm
Posted by eschaton on 07/21/2015
McKenna and Sheldrake were good friends and had some fascinating conversations about this topic and many others. Sheldrake has a book called 'The Science Delusion' where he discusses 10 problems or delusions of science. I believe he discusses this in his TEDx talk. Mainstream science tries to bash and marginalize Rupert and also a few years back a "crazy man" ran on stage and stabbed him while he was giving a lecture, so they obviously do not like him pointing out the glaring flaws of science.
As far as Mckenna here is a clip discussing what gnosticwarrior was mentioning. When I first found out that "The speed of light" is not even a constant it was a eye opener to the lies and flaws of "science".
Here is a similar but different clip of Mckenna talking about speed of light
Jul 20, 2015 19:48:45 GMT bemoody said:
Jul 19, 2015 12:45:21 GMT gnosticwarrior said:
I remember Terence McKenna once mentioning in a lecture, how it's absolutely asinine to assume that the speed of light (being measured once or twice in a lab in the early 1900's) is taken as the pinnacle of measurement.
He also went on to state how most measurements are not stable, and fluctuate up and down to a certain degree. "Scientist" round off the anomalies - which are what True Reality actually is; a constantly fluctuating standing-wave pattern - and then flatten out numbers which are actually just gross approximations, that are then taken as be-all-end-all gospel from the high priests of scientism. Materialists gonna materialize!
The anti-semite thing regarding Einstein just made a whole lot more sense to me. Can you say "bases covered"?
The McKenna observation reminds me of a Rupert Sheldrake lecture where he talks about how seemingly every week the figures on the 'constants of nature' used as scientific premises needed to be updated. These 'constants' wouldn't be changing depending on whatever predetermined results these scientismists were looking for before they tested, now would they? Hmmm.
McKenna and Sheldrake were good friends and had some fascinating conversations about this topic and many others. Sheldrake has a book called 'The Science Delusion' where he discusses 10 problems or delusions of science. I believe he discusses this in his TEDx talk. Mainstream science tries to bash and marginalize Rupert and also a few years back a "crazy man" ran on stage and stabbed him while he was giving a lecture, so they obviously do not like him pointing out the glaring flaws of science.
As far as Mckenna here is a clip discussing what gnosticwarrior was mentioning. When I first found out that "The speed of light" is not even a constant it was a eye opener to the lies and flaws of "science".
Here is a similar but different clip of Mckenna talking about speed of light
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:31 pm
Posted by gnosticwarrior on 07/21/2015
Yes! Sheldrake is my guy. The part you're referring to, is when he speaks of how there's literally a fax machine-like device that gives them updates on "cosmological constants". "Big G" (gravity) is up five points this week!
Also, the best part is when he confronts them on "fudging" the numbers - and they tell him "We don't call it "fudging"; we call it "intellectual phase-locking". 
Jul 20, 2015 19:48:45 GMT bemoody said:
Jul 19, 2015 12:45:21 GMT gnosticwarrior said:
I remember Terence McKenna once mentioning in a lecture, how it's absolutely asinine to assume that the speed of light (being measured once or twice in a lab in the early 1900's) is taken as the pinnacle of measurement.
He also went on to state how most measurements are not stable, and fluctuate up and down to a certain degree. "Scientist" round off the anomalies - which are what True Reality actually is; a constantly fluctuating standing-wave pattern - and then flatten out numbers which are actually just gross approximations, that are then taken as be-all-end-all gospel from the high priests of scientism. Materialists gonna materialize!
The anti-semite thing regarding Einstein just made a whole lot more sense to me. Can you say "bases covered"?
The McKenna observation reminds me of a Rupert Sheldrake lecture where he talks about how seemingly every week the figures on the 'constants of nature' used as scientific premises needed to be updated. These 'constants' wouldn't be changing depending on whatever predetermined results these scientismists were looking for before they tested, now would they? Hmmm.
Yes! Sheldrake is my guy. The part you're referring to, is when he speaks of how there's literally a fax machine-like device that gives them updates on "cosmological constants". "Big G" (gravity) is up five points this week!
Also, the best part is when he confronts them on "fudging" the numbers - and they tell him "We don't call it "fudging"; we call it "intellectual phase-locking". _________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:32 pm
Posted by gnosticwarrior on 07/21/2015
Everyone who HASN'T checked out Science Set Free/The Science Delusion absolutely must. It jives with everything we discuss. Sheldrake is probably the only high-level academic actively making a career out of challenging (and even questioning) the dogmas of scientism. There are several vids of him lecturing this in front of physicist and scholars, and the reactions are just as you'd expect. He keeps his cool and just dismantles all opposition.
The fact that he was "banned" from TED talk speaks volumes. This guy is so on the button.
Everyone who HASN'T checked out Science Set Free/The Science Delusion absolutely must. It jives with everything we discuss. Sheldrake is probably the only high-level academic actively making a career out of challenging (and even questioning) the dogmas of scientism. There are several vids of him lecturing this in front of physicist and scholars, and the reactions are just as you'd expect. He keeps his cool and just dismantles all opposition.
The fact that he was "banned" from TED talk speaks volumes. This guy is so on the button.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:32 pm
Posted by csp on 07/22/2015
Thanks gnosticwarrior, I've not seen that talk before - it's actually a very good video to get people started before throwing FE at them. It touches on all the right subjects and will likely help break through the thick layer of cognitive dissonance!
Thanks gnosticwarrior, I've not seen that talk before - it's actually a very good video to get people started before throwing FE at them. It touches on all the right subjects and will likely help break through the thick layer of cognitive dissonance!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:32 pm
Posted by susie on 09/21/2015
Relativity Invalidated
Relativity Invalidated
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:33 pm
Posted by rebecca on 09/21/2015
Gregg Braden in the following vid at 50 seconds speaks about the Mishaelson and Morley experiment and how another experiment in the 80s proved them right! That Aether did exist!
Now interestingly Braden is now a spiritual dude but he has a science background. In this talk he is bringing this up to show how we are all connected in the ether. But he must have known the significance of this test and how it pertains to flat earth!
BTW this is an EXCELLENT thread!
Gregg Braden in the following vid at 50 seconds speaks about the Mishaelson and Morley experiment and how another experiment in the 80s proved them right! That Aether did exist!
Now interestingly Braden is now a spiritual dude but he has a science background. In this talk he is bringing this up to show how we are all connected in the ether. But he must have known the significance of this test and how it pertains to flat earth!
BTW this is an EXCELLENT thread!
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:33 pm
Posted by paranoidgramdroid on 09/22/2015
Aether is more or less an anagram of Earth (with a sneaky E tucked in there)
Is it possible we have been presented with a huge mistranslation for hundreds of years?
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the aether. And the aether was without form, and void..."
Just a thought.
Aether is more or less an anagram of Earth (with a sneaky E tucked in there)
Is it possible we have been presented with a huge mistranslation for hundreds of years?
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the aether. And the aether was without form, and void..."
Just a thought.
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:34 pm
Posted by rare on 09/22/2015
This guy's part time job is debunking relativity.
relativity
This guy's part time job is debunking relativity.
relativity
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Admin Mon Feb 01, 2016 7:34 pm
Last edited by Admin on Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:47 am; edited 2 times in total
Admin- Admin
- Posts : 1906
Points : 8974
Reputation : 3799
Join date : 2015-12-30 -
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Thinkforyourself Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:10 pm
Wonderful job Eric! You have crushed this nonsensical 'theory' once and for all, and anyone open-minded will see that it was only a conspiracy to try and hide the true reality that is Geocentrism.Admin wrote:
_________________
All about Shillaphobia
Shun the non-believers!
'Flat Earth Diva'
Supposed 'temper temper beanpole', 'snidy weasel' and 'clueless, cloying, sychophant.'
Apparently 'dangerous person'
Thinkforyourself- Admin
- Posts : 2048
Points : 8144
Reputation : 2862
Join date : 2015-12-30
Age : 35
Location : United Kingdom
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by George Tirebiter Sun Feb 28, 2016 5:22 pm
Death by Mathematics
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments,
and they wander off through equation after equation and
eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."— Nikola Tesla
"In the 20th century, physics underwent a transformation. No one would deny that. But normally the transformation is credited to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. And normally the transformation is seen as a great advance. In this paper I will argue the opposite. The transformation was due more to a transformation in mathematics, and that transformation has been almost wholly deleterious."(1)
"This transformation due to mathematics began in the 19th century, but it did not engulf physics until the 20th century. In the 19th century the stage was set: we had several abstract mathematical fields that reached "fruition", including a math based on action variables and principles, a math based on curved space, a math based on matrices, a math based on tensors, a math based on i, and a math based on infinities."(1)
"As I have shown, 19th century mathematics inherited many unsolved problems from the past, including problems from Euclid and Newton. It made no progress in solving these problems because it did not recognize them as problems. It had already given up on foundational questions as "metaphysics", and it preferred instead to create more and more abstract systems. The more abstract the mathematical system became, the more successful it could be in avoiding foundational questions."(1)
"Einstein himself was very wary of abstract math, purposely avoiding it until 1912. Put simply, he "did not trust it." But in that year he discovered Gauss, and called on his friend Grossman to help him with the math. A couple of years later Einstein was hired in Berlin, and there he got even better help, from Hilbert and Klein, no less. Einstein had asked the wolf in at the front door."(1)
"The mathematics department, invited to consult, would see its opportunity to steal the show, and it has since stolen the show. Someone like Feynman could throw barbs at the math department, but this was only misdirection. The top mathematicians could look back over their shoulder in feigned opposition, only because they had already taken over the physics department. Feynman was not smirking at mathematics, he was smirking at mathematicians who were too narrow to crossover and become famous, like he had. It was as if to say, “We now own physics, the queen of the sciences and the modern kingmaker, and you guys prefer to argue over trivialities like Fermat. That will never win you a Nobel Prize or a trip to the White House.”(1)
"Einstein’s success with the tensor calculus called all the present demons out of the closet, invited them all into the kitchen, and gave them control of the fire. He showed the road to fame, and the first stop on that road was enlisting a new abstract mathematics. That has been the road ever since, and it defines the current low road of string theory, which had planned to awe all opposition with a math so great and so abstract there was no beginning or end to it (its plan is not moving as planned). Quantum Mechanics was the first to learn this lesson, though, and Heisenberg was the greatest student. Heisenberg understood first and best how to use mathematics to impress and cow the audience. He also understood first and best how to use mathematics as a tool of propaganda. A math of proper abstraction and complexity could be used to hide all error, to divert all effort, to deflect all criticism. It could be used like a very heavy, very highly decorated quilt, covering the bedbugs beneath. This new abstract math would come not with a foundation, but with a manifesto. It did not have axioms, it had public relations. It was not sold with an explanation, but with an "interpretation", and this interpretation was to be accepted on authority."(1)
"Yes, modern physics has become a neo-scholasticism. It is the avoidance of real questions in the pursuit of trivial methodology. It is the memorization of an endless list of names and manipulations in lieu of understanding mechanics. It is the setting up in some black data hole and extemporizing on an endless string of evermore ridiculous hypotheses instead of looking at known physical problems closer at hand. It is the knee-jerk invocation of authority and the explicit squelching of dissent. It is the hiding behind tall gates and a million gatekeepers, and euphemizing it as "peer review." It is the institutionalized acceptance of censorship and the creation of dogma. Grand Masters like Feynman say "shut up and calculate!" and everyone finds this amusing. No one finds it a clear instance of fascism and oppression. An internet search on "against Feynman" or "Feynman was wrong" or "disagree with Feynman" turns up nothing. The field is monolithic. It is completely controlled and one-dimensional. All discussion has been purged from the standard model, and all debate has been marginalized. Any non-standard opinion must be from a "crank" and blacklisting is widespread. Publishing is also controlled, both in academia and in the mainstream. Einstein already found science publishing too controlled for his taste in the 30's, refusing to work with Physical Review. What would he think now? Can anyone imagine his early papers getting published in the current atmosphere?"(1)
"If you are an insider at a major university, you can publish anything, the more absurd the better. You can say anything without fear of contradiction or analysis, since science most wants right now to be creative, and it thinks (like modern art) that absurdity is the most creative thing possible. The paradox is the highest distinction, the contradiction the surest sign of elevation. The contemporary physics paper has become like Dubuffet's La Lunette Farcie, a purposeful mockery of all convention, a nothing packaged as a something. Soon the physicist may be expected to follow Duchamp, publishing a toilet seat as a TOE."(1)
"Contrary to what we are told, contemporary physics is not booming. It is not very near to omniscience, it is not the crown jewel of anything. In fact, it is near death. It has been damaged by any number of things, only a few of which I have mentioned by name here. But the prime murderer has been abstract mathematics. Physics has succumbed to a suffocation. It is the victim of a strangulation. It is in a not-so-shallow grave, and piled on top of it like dirt are a thousand fields and operators and variables and names and spaces and terms and eigenvalues and dimensions and criteria and functions and coordinates and conjugates and bases and bijective maps and automorphism groups and abelian gauge fields and Dirac spinors and Feynman diagrams and so on ad nauseum. The only way the grave could be any deeper and darker, in fact, is if we allowed Deconstruction to dump its transfinite dictionary of onanic terms on top of this one."(1)
Cite (Read More)-
(1) http://milesmathis.com/death.html
Today's scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments,
and they wander off through equation after equation and
eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality."— Nikola Tesla
"In the 20th century, physics underwent a transformation. No one would deny that. But normally the transformation is credited to Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. And normally the transformation is seen as a great advance. In this paper I will argue the opposite. The transformation was due more to a transformation in mathematics, and that transformation has been almost wholly deleterious."(1)
"This transformation due to mathematics began in the 19th century, but it did not engulf physics until the 20th century. In the 19th century the stage was set: we had several abstract mathematical fields that reached "fruition", including a math based on action variables and principles, a math based on curved space, a math based on matrices, a math based on tensors, a math based on i, and a math based on infinities."(1)
"As I have shown, 19th century mathematics inherited many unsolved problems from the past, including problems from Euclid and Newton. It made no progress in solving these problems because it did not recognize them as problems. It had already given up on foundational questions as "metaphysics", and it preferred instead to create more and more abstract systems. The more abstract the mathematical system became, the more successful it could be in avoiding foundational questions."(1)
"Einstein himself was very wary of abstract math, purposely avoiding it until 1912. Put simply, he "did not trust it." But in that year he discovered Gauss, and called on his friend Grossman to help him with the math. A couple of years later Einstein was hired in Berlin, and there he got even better help, from Hilbert and Klein, no less. Einstein had asked the wolf in at the front door."(1)
"The mathematics department, invited to consult, would see its opportunity to steal the show, and it has since stolen the show. Someone like Feynman could throw barbs at the math department, but this was only misdirection. The top mathematicians could look back over their shoulder in feigned opposition, only because they had already taken over the physics department. Feynman was not smirking at mathematics, he was smirking at mathematicians who were too narrow to crossover and become famous, like he had. It was as if to say, “We now own physics, the queen of the sciences and the modern kingmaker, and you guys prefer to argue over trivialities like Fermat. That will never win you a Nobel Prize or a trip to the White House.”(1)
"Einstein’s success with the tensor calculus called all the present demons out of the closet, invited them all into the kitchen, and gave them control of the fire. He showed the road to fame, and the first stop on that road was enlisting a new abstract mathematics. That has been the road ever since, and it defines the current low road of string theory, which had planned to awe all opposition with a math so great and so abstract there was no beginning or end to it (its plan is not moving as planned). Quantum Mechanics was the first to learn this lesson, though, and Heisenberg was the greatest student. Heisenberg understood first and best how to use mathematics to impress and cow the audience. He also understood first and best how to use mathematics as a tool of propaganda. A math of proper abstraction and complexity could be used to hide all error, to divert all effort, to deflect all criticism. It could be used like a very heavy, very highly decorated quilt, covering the bedbugs beneath. This new abstract math would come not with a foundation, but with a manifesto. It did not have axioms, it had public relations. It was not sold with an explanation, but with an "interpretation", and this interpretation was to be accepted on authority."(1)
"Yes, modern physics has become a neo-scholasticism. It is the avoidance of real questions in the pursuit of trivial methodology. It is the memorization of an endless list of names and manipulations in lieu of understanding mechanics. It is the setting up in some black data hole and extemporizing on an endless string of evermore ridiculous hypotheses instead of looking at known physical problems closer at hand. It is the knee-jerk invocation of authority and the explicit squelching of dissent. It is the hiding behind tall gates and a million gatekeepers, and euphemizing it as "peer review." It is the institutionalized acceptance of censorship and the creation of dogma. Grand Masters like Feynman say "shut up and calculate!" and everyone finds this amusing. No one finds it a clear instance of fascism and oppression. An internet search on "against Feynman" or "Feynman was wrong" or "disagree with Feynman" turns up nothing. The field is monolithic. It is completely controlled and one-dimensional. All discussion has been purged from the standard model, and all debate has been marginalized. Any non-standard opinion must be from a "crank" and blacklisting is widespread. Publishing is also controlled, both in academia and in the mainstream. Einstein already found science publishing too controlled for his taste in the 30's, refusing to work with Physical Review. What would he think now? Can anyone imagine his early papers getting published in the current atmosphere?"(1)
"If you are an insider at a major university, you can publish anything, the more absurd the better. You can say anything without fear of contradiction or analysis, since science most wants right now to be creative, and it thinks (like modern art) that absurdity is the most creative thing possible. The paradox is the highest distinction, the contradiction the surest sign of elevation. The contemporary physics paper has become like Dubuffet's La Lunette Farcie, a purposeful mockery of all convention, a nothing packaged as a something. Soon the physicist may be expected to follow Duchamp, publishing a toilet seat as a TOE."(1)
"Contrary to what we are told, contemporary physics is not booming. It is not very near to omniscience, it is not the crown jewel of anything. In fact, it is near death. It has been damaged by any number of things, only a few of which I have mentioned by name here. But the prime murderer has been abstract mathematics. Physics has succumbed to a suffocation. It is the victim of a strangulation. It is in a not-so-shallow grave, and piled on top of it like dirt are a thousand fields and operators and variables and names and spaces and terms and eigenvalues and dimensions and criteria and functions and coordinates and conjugates and bases and bijective maps and automorphism groups and abelian gauge fields and Dirac spinors and Feynman diagrams and so on ad nauseum. The only way the grave could be any deeper and darker, in fact, is if we allowed Deconstruction to dump its transfinite dictionary of onanic terms on top of this one."(1)
Cite (Read More)-
(1) http://milesmathis.com/death.html
George Tirebiter- Posts : 51
Points : 3200
Reputation : 132
Join date : 2016-02-03
Re: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong
by Themis Sat Mar 12, 2016 12:22 pm
Admin wrote:
Great video Eric.
Here, little about Albert Einstein .
Albert Einstein was high ranked Zionist politician. And deep involved in creation of State of Israel, same as in others plans of manipulation with humanity.
Hebrew University of Jerusalem was established in 1918, (when cornerstone for the university was laid) 30 years before the State of Israel. Founding a university was proposed as far back as 1884 in the Kattowitz (Katowice) conference of the Hovevei Zion society.One of the visions of the Zionist movement .
In 1921 Albert Einstein joined Chaim Weizmann in a fund-raising mission to the US on behalf of the Jewish National Fund to establish the Hebrew University in Jerusalem.
(Chaim Weizmann Zionist leader and President of the Zionist Organization and later as the first President of Israel.)
Photograph of Albert Einstein and "leaders of the World Zionist Organization" published in the USA in 1921. Also pictured are with Chaim Weizmann ,Menachem Ussishkin and Ben-Zion Mossinson .
[size=16]The first Board of Governors of Hebrew University of Jerusalem included Albert Einstein, Sigmund Freud, Martin Buber, and Chaim Weizmann.
In his Will, Albert Einstein left the Hebrew University his personal papers and the copyright to them. The Albert Einstein Archives on Hebrew University of Jerusalem contain some 55,000 items.
Before that, In 1925, the original 46-page manuscript of the general theory of relativity (published in 1915) ended up at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Last edited by Themis on Sat May 14, 2016 11:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Themis- Posts : 48
Points : 3257
Reputation : 216
Join date : 2016-02-27
Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Similar topics» Flat Earth Shill Wall of Shame
» Toward a better theory of “gravity” - Bubbles
» NASA Fail Compilation
» Greenland Theory
» The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
» Toward a better theory of “gravity” - Bubbles
» NASA Fail Compilation
» Greenland Theory
» The Flat Moon Over the Flat Earth
IFERS - Exposing the 'Global' Conspiracy From Atlantis to Zion :: Heliocentricity, Geocentricity, Cosmology and Cosmogeny
Page 1 of 2
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum|
|
|