“…everybody seems to think I am a crackpot. we’ll see who laughs last.”
The mod note in that thread is the funniest bit:
I quite enjoyed:
Well, he did say that he had trouble identifying sarcasm.
And, really, didn’t the Michelson–Morley experiment depend on that nasty math to disprove the ether? Lavoisier also used math, well, addition, to disprove the phlogiston theory. Once you’ve decided to rely on narrativium, rather than measurements and math, your story can go anywhere.
I think I won the thread.
There is no winner in this thread. Only Zuul
This is solid physics. OK, you convinced me.
Zuul’s dead, baby. Zuul’s dead.
I was hoping that would be the scene from Pulp Fiction. I don’t think the OP speaks English or physics.
his belief is based on an incorrect model of gravity.
when you rely on measurements taken in any relative space as a basis for developing a mathematical equation to describe the universe, your equation is only relevant in the teeny tiny relative space that you took your measurement at. Math is only a language, the universe is much more complicated. So quit Idolizing math as the supreme language.
I don’t think it’s sarcasm he is having trouble recognizing.
We need more authentic frontier gibberish.
I know you’re not joking, but you can’t be serious.
so is yours, sheep,
Oh, yeah? Well Tuesday apple banana loud!
-And Fry, you’very got that brain thing.
-I already did!
Ha! The “sheep”/“sheeple” comes out. That tells me all I need to know about the person and their ideas, whatever claim they may be making.
It is easy to understand how he reached that conclusion–everyone he tells his “theory” to goes “bah, bah!”