Re: The Shapiro's experiment HOAX. A 1968 TIME article.

Den 19.10.2024 19:48, skrev rhertz:

 Paul, you are much more stupid than I am (which I don't deny).
 An actual fact is that I recognize being 45% stupid and 55% smart, but
you don't recognize that your stupidity reaches almost 100& since you
converted to relativism, Mr. EE.

Converted?
I was 14 years when I read my first popular book on relativity.
SR and GR have always been part of classical physics in my world.

  Look at your online history since you converted to the cult of
relativism about 20 years ago. It's a SHAME, but also profiles your
personality quite well.
 Coward enough to even think about alternate polemic points of view, you
opted to adhere to relativism guidelines, and followed it religiously,
because you don't have the balls to write something original of your
own, and choose instead to compile lists of papers validating
relativity. And this M.O. of yours is pathetic, showing your complete
lack of originality.
 Your online life became a very sad pattern: You are fishing online,
waiting for some post criticizing relativity and then, you resort to
your aged library just to post references validated only in your
community, where you feel safe and protected by mainstream relativism.
 If such a case exist where you have doubts about your belief or
thoughts, you CAN'T show them in any post. Your position is to HIDE AND
WAIT for some conflicting post, and then use your lame database as the
only support for your critics. You are TERRIFIED to express any
deviation from the "book of relativism".
  I, on the other extreme, AM LOOKING ALWAYS for the opportunity TO
CHALLENGE relativistic credence or established points of view, and try
to show the other side of relativism: a dark one, full of complicity,
data manipulation, worship to a figure hyped to extremes, trying to
prove that the entire PSEUDOSCIENCE OF RELATIVISM has ANY value in the
scientific/technological world (which is absolutely true).

Quite.
And now we can see how much your originality and your thoughts with
your own brain have brought to physics. Right?

 You should return (even when it's too late for you) to microprogramming
and working as a tutor for experiments with digital electronics, instead
of living A PARASITIC, WORTHLESS LIFE in a cloud of lies, deceptions and
hidden agendas (about the value of relativism in the world).

Thanks for your very wise words, Richard.
I will indeed keep living A PARASITIC, WORTHLESS LIFE in a cloud
of lies, deceptions and hidden agendas (about the value of relativism
in the world).
:-D

 When I wrote that I pity you, I meant it by heart.

Of course you did.
You are a very nice person, and will obviously pity the idiots
who doesn't realise that all physicist born after 1900 are members
of a MAFFIA, and profit from it, and their experimental results
are COOKED with the help of statistical manipulations, fraud,
cooking and peer complicity.

 Finally, try to write something of value about the importance of Shapiro
's work or HIPPARCOS in the real world, IF YOU CAN (using your own brain
exclusively).

I can't, like you, invent how HIPPARCOS works, using my own brain exclusively.
Here is how HIPPARCOS doesn't work invented by _your_ own brain exclusively:
" Making things worse, enter the French people, stealing data from
  HIPPARCOS and claiming that they resolved the REAL POSITION of hundred
  of stars with precision in the order of tens of micro-arcseconds.
  WHO, IN ITS SANE STATE OF MIND, CAN AFFIRM THAT THIS HIPPARCOS HOAX HAS
  THE LEAST PRACTICAL VALUE?
  And all of the above, so relativists can claim that GR works?"
But you are right, of course.
As you can see here:
https://sci.esa.int/web/hipparcos/-/47357-fact-sheet
It is obvious that ESA invested €600,000,000 in a HOAX with
the sole purpose of making the stupid relativist believe that GR works.
The HIPPARCOS catalogue with 118218 stars charted with unprecedented
accuracy, is clearly a fraud, which the idiot astronomers have bought.
There is no way HIPPARCOS could measure the positions and distances with
the precision given in that catalogue.
Don't you agree, Richard?

 Bye, lame Norwegian.

Are you going somewhere?
I will stay here and will keep proving you wrong again and again.
And again.
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/