E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy..they're serious

[L.Wood]

.

Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy

'To many conservatives, almost everything is a secret liberal plot: from fluoride in the water to medicare reimbursements for end-of-life planning with your doctor to efforts to teach evolution in schools. But Conservapedia founder and Eagle Forum University instructor Andy Schlafly -- Phyllis Schlafly's son -- has found one more liberal plot: the theory of relativity.
....
"In the entry, "Counterexamples to Relativity," the authors (including Schlafly) write:

The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[1]

To what does that reference lead? Why, a note by Schlafly:

See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by Barack Obama. Virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold

TPM for your Howler of the Week

'Your assignment, should you choose to take it, is to make one up more ridiculous.'

.

[L.Wood]

[kwlyon]

Wood,

The EARTH IS NOT FLAT!!! YOU ARE AN IDIOT!!! IT IS ALSO NOT A SPHERE!!! I AM THE SMARTEST MAN ON EARTH!!!! 4 SIMULTANIOUS CUBE DAYS = OBAMA CARE SOCIALISM! CHILDREN TURN TO THEIR EVIL HATRED OF CUBE TRUTH!!! SOME REFERENCE TO PORCH MONKEYS FROM DENIAL OF GOD TIME!

http://www.timecube.com/

[Dardedar]

As absolutely unbelievably stupid this conservapedia thing is, I do believe Kevin, you have topped him with your link to the cube man.

Stop the planet, I want to get off.

[Dardedar]

The vast majority of people, including me, won't understand why most of these counter "arguments" to relativity are wrong. This presents a unique teaching moment. Take the lemon and make lemonade.

It's nice to see someone has done just that:

Right-wing refutations of relativity really, really wrong!

Excerpt:

***
the author relies on a familiar form of rhetorical trickery known as the “Gish Gallop“: throw as many claims out there as possible, regardless of their validity, with the realization that most people will be swayed by the amount of “evidence”, and not look too closely at the details.

Looking at the “evidence”, it is clear that there isn’t a single point made that isn’t misleading, incoherent, or simply dishonest. A person reading the Conservapedia post will be measurably more ignorant afterwards, and I get the distinct impression that this is what the author intended.

But never fear, dear reader! I’m here to go through the list of some of the most entertaining assertions, and explain why they’re nonsense. Why bother, you ask? For one thing, entertainment. For another, there’s always a chance that someone may come across the Conservapedia entry and look for some sort of counterbalance… someone should write one!
***

The rest here.

I am going to post the 28 point list that currently exists at conservapedia just in case it happens to disappear.

The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.[1] Here is a list of 28 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect.

1. The Pioneer anomaly.
2. Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by Earth ("flybys").[2]
3. Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by relativity, well beyond the margin of error.[3]
4. The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light.
5. The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass?
6. The observed lack of curvature in overall space.[4]
7. The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominated and contradicted Relativity.
8. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement.[5]
9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.
10. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching.
11. The inability of the theory to lead to other insights, contrary to every verified theory of physics.
12. The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions.[6]
13. The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe.[7]
14. "The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two [QM and Relativity] conceptions of time don’t gel."[8]
15. The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violate causality and permit absurd time travel.[9]
16. The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered (and thus low entropy) black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[10]
17. Data from the PSR B1913+16 increasingly diverge from predictions of the General Theory of Relativity such that, despite a Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded for early work on this pulsar, no data at all have been released about it for over five years.
18. The lack of useful devices developed based on any insights provided by the theory; no lives have been saved or helped, and the theory has not led to other useful theories and may have interfered with scientific progress.[11] This stands in stark contrast with every verified theory of science. The only devices based on relativity are the atom bomb, the nuclear power plant, and medical scans such as PET (Postitron Emmision Tomography), but they have destroyed far more lives than they have saved so they can hardly be considered useful.
19. Relativity requires different values for the inertia of a moving object: in its direction of motion, and perpendicular to that direction. This contradicts the logical principle that the laws of physics are the same in all directions.
20. Relativity requires that anything traveling at the speed of light must have mass zero, so it must have momentum zero. But the laws of electrodynamics require that light have nonzero momentum.
21. Unlike most well-tested fundamental physical theories, the theory of relativity violates conditions of a conservative field. Path independence, for example, is lacking under the theory of relativity, as in the "twin paradox" whereby the age of each twin under the theory is dependent on the path he traveled.[12]
22. The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (2πR) is length-contracted. However, since R is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to an apparent paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal R, or is it less than R?
23. The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his "clock" (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because both twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative. Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.[13]
24. Relativity predicted that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory.
25. Relativity claims the aether does not exist, but in order to make subatomic physics work right, theorists had to introduce the aether-like concept of the Higgs field, which fills all of space and breaks symmetries.
26. Minkowski space is predicated on the idea of four-dimensional vectors of which one component is time. However, one of the properties of a vector space is that every vector have an inverse. Time cannot be a vector because it has no inverse.
27. It is impossible to perform an experiment to determine whether Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, or the older Lorentz aether theory is correct. Believing one over the other is a matter of faith.
28. In Genesis 1:6-8, we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous aether.

[Dardedar]

Oh, and note, the guy who put together that ignorant pile of crap about relativity? Andrew Schlafly:

"He was accepted at both Princeton and Harvard Law. He is obviously very well educated. He graduated both after a distinguished academic career."

Einstein, Relativity and the Wingnuts

Showing there is no limit, no limit whatsoever, to the degree that religious indoctrination can rot the human brain.

D.
----------------------
"The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." Albert Einstein

[Doug]

"He was accepted at both Princeton and Harvard Law. He is obviously very well educated. He graduated both after a distinguished academic career."

DOUG writes:
And we should believe a single attorney over the entire field of professional physicists, on the subject of physics, because..?

That the right-wingers would stoop this low is just hilarious. The right-wingers are in a panic because their party is in shambles, and this only makes them look more looney than they do already.

[kwlyon]

Why is the "right wing" spending time "debunking" scientific theories?

[Dardedar]

Why is the "right wing" spending time "debunking" scientific theories?

DAR
If you read the article you will see that this guy is so dumb he has confused relativity with moral relativism. The irony being that he graduated from Princeton and Harvard.



Excerpt:

"That creates a puzzle: how could someone as bright and as well-educated produce web entries so perfectly inane.

Schlafly’s main argument appears to confuse relativity, an abstraction in physics, with relativism, a philosophical argument having nothing to do with physics. He believes that accepting relativity leads to moral and religious relativism, which is like saying growing apples leads to giraffes.

What seems to have triggered it was a 1989 Harvard Law Review article, now all over the internet, written by liberal law professor Lawrence Tribe, using relativity as a metaphor for understanding constitutional law. Tribe thanked Barack Obama in the footnotes (which isn’t surprising since Obama was then editor of the Review), hence it must be a liberal conspiracy."

Einstein, Relativity and the Wingnuts