Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
it says atmospheric lensing its 15 times bigger than gravitational lensing, how could eisntein have accounted for this, i dont say relativity is wrong i say einstein proof its invalid since he had no way to account for sun atmospheric lensin
|
If the above is true then why did you say the following...
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
really im not sure if light is bent by gravity
|
Regardless, if you don't believe the 1919 methods were accurate SHOW THE DETAILS OF THE EXPERIMENT THAT PROVE IT DID NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT REFRACTION.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raaaid
dont you think my being fourth hit on relativity+ sun+ atmosphere proves i have original ideas which would be a shame censoring for being quite unique?
|
No, not at all, and even the most clueless person among us would agree with me. All it means that the words in your search string scored a high relevance factor in Google's calculation and that is it.
As far as censoring, no subject you have every posted about has ever been censored. If it were censored, your posts would be removed by the matrix MCP. Yet they are not.
By far, the most ridiculous arguments you have made on this board are the ones where you post a link about something in the same sentence in which you claim that it is censored. If it were censored then the link would fail. Yet, they do not fail. Thus, you are, once again, proven wrong.
The best example of this was your ludicrous "fornix muscle" thread where you posted the link to the, "censored", video about the doctor who invented the machine to strengthen the eye muscles.
THERE WAS A LINK TO THE DOCTOR'S WEBSITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ON THE DOCTOR'S WEBSITE WAS A LINK TO THE NASA STUDY HE PARTICIPATED IN!!!!!!!
So, here we have....
A youtube video freely available
The doctor's website freely available
NASA (the freaking government!!!!!!!) published a study about his methods
Yeah, lots of censorship there.
As usual you are wrong about everything.
--Outlaw.