Einstein exposed.
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (107)
sorted by:
Then why that totally murky and suspcious story about Einshtein is so believble for you?
Physiscs of course, less politicised than climatology, biology or medicine, but it is under influence too. If Einshtein story is not enough for you, take a look at a story with fusion energy, when since 60s we are every year promised with "cheap fusion energy" in 10 years. All 60 years along with zero practically useful results. If you compare that with nuclear fission, then you find out that first practically useful nuclear fission power plant was connected to power grid in 1954, just after just 21 years since first idea of nuclear chain reaction appeared in 1933. Taking in account scientific and tech progress from 1933 to 1960, nuclear fusion reactors should have been took less time from idea to practically useful result. But today it is over 80 years of endless "in 10 years" promises and endless tax money throwed into that scam. There are also many other examples of sudden progress slowdown, from high-temperature superconductors to space exploration.
Scientific and technological progress slowdown since late 1960s is undeniable, even electronics have no any significant breakthroughs since that time, all we have is just a miniaturisation of well known things, nothing really new was invented or discovered at all.
Climate of the past, even very distant past is not a secret at all. For reference you could search for "eocene climate" f.e. Last stable climate laster for tens of millions of years that was disrupted by some cataclism with following ice age we are coming out of. Earth was green from pole to pole with moderate and stable climate with average temperature around +20°C and CO2 concentration of 1200ppm. It is more than reasonable to suppose that this was natural Earth climate, we are leading to. In honor of that times when mammals developed, we keep temperature in our homes at around +20°C (not +5°C). Also, 1200ppm of CO2 is recommended concentration for best harvest in greenhouses.
Of course, data from paleontologists does not fit into modern narrative, that is why they refer only to a tiny period of last centuries.
Science has a history of being wrong for a span then corrected then being wrong then being corrected for us to assume what is known about the climate is correct is foolish to say the least and hubristic at most same goes with all fields of science.
Because Einstein at his worst was a once in a generation thinker, whatevers been built upon his observations I cannot say the same and many very smart people have spent a lot of time trying to disprove his observations
It is a normal scientific process. That's what Einshtein worshippers try to break.
In normal situation, after first succesfull replication of Gunter Nimtz experiment, scientists had to at least deeply revisit Einshtein "relativity" and came out with new theory, where is no any casuality violations possible when signal is transmitted faster than light. But that's not what happened. I don't even know who is hated most today - Gunter itself who get 4.7c or those guys who replicated with much more advanced instruments and come to conclusion that signal tunneling takes zero time, i.e. have infinite speed. This obviously falsifies "special relativity". Nobody could disprove experiments results, so the Einshtein crowd turned to lies and personal attacks.
He wasn't. He was made "media darling" to circumvent normal scientific process. Whole life and career of Einshtein is suspicious at minimum.
Problem is that Einshtein doesn't have any observations at all. His relativity is purely mathematical excercise. As you might know, math is not a science, it is a language for science. And as in inay other language you could spell total bullshit in math that have nothing to do with reality.
Again, if you still don't get the trick done by Einshtein and his handlers: Both relativity theories completely miss the point that observation is a process too. And it is done in all Einshtein reasoning using light, which itself introduce distortions in observation, because it have limited speed and vulnerable to gravitation. Lorenz transforms show not that something elongating, or time slow down in moving object, but that observer observe this elongation and slowing because he use light to observe, Same is with general relativity. Light could bent near massive bodies not because continuum is curved, but because gravity affects energy, just like it affects mass.
Taking all of that you will get exactly same equations, that equally predict what you observe, but they will have completely different meaning. And of course, there will be no any "fundamental" limitations that was sucked from Einshtein finder with single purpose - to cancel any research in unwanted directions like FTL or gravity control.
Interesting, that unlike all other scientific theories, Einshtein relativity is a first and only scientific theory that never produced any practically useful inventions, but on the contrary, closed a ways to many important possible breakthroughs.
Think about it, why that only theory with so weird influence on the science is so dogmatically protected from any possibility to be disproven. It is literally used as "Einshtein was genius, and if you find something that does not fit, then you are just fool and does not understand relativity". It is not a science at all, it is religion.
My fax machine must be on the fritz because I never got that memo. What's stopping you?
I'll be glad to get a grant for FTL research. Where could I apply for it to continue Gunter Nimtz work? Name me at least one scientific entity in the world who will approve and finance research of something fundamentally contradicting Einshtein dogma. Just one.