Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy

[Modbert]

Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy | TPMMuckraker

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

Schlafly also points to the Bible as a reason that Einstein's theory must be wrong:

9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.

Schlafly brags on Conservapedia that he has homeschooled 185 children, all of whom do exceptionally well on standardized tests.

As with Wikipedia and other online crowd-sourced resources, Conservapedia is a colloborative effort of its users and any registered user can post to the site. Schlafly is a frequent contributor to the site, and is identified as the initial author of the entry and well as the editor of the note identified above. Schlafly did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

 

[goldcatt]

I guess the authors weren't those 6% of Republican scientists.

 

[Greenbeard]

I suppose science would seem liberal to an anti-science conservative. It's all relative.

 

[Ravi]

That's hysterical. As is Conservapedia.

 

[Modbert]

That's hysterical. As is Conservapedia.

Their rewriting the bible project is hilarious. Remember, do your duty and go through changing the names Moses or Jesus to Stephen Colbert.

 

[rdean]

You guys better be careful. The "right" doesn't it when you don't take "mysticism" and "the occult" seriously.

They call you names and swear at you. Although, I've found if you DON'T swear, they don't understand.

 

[Tom Clancy]

I must admit..

This is pretty damn funny.

 

[rightwinger]

Other Liberal Theories

1. Evolution

2. Cigarettes cause cancer

3. Global warming

4. Gravity

 

[Kaiser Soze]

Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy | TPMMuckraker

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

Schlafly also points to the Bible as a reason that Einstein's theory must be wrong:

9. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54.

Schlafly brags on Conservapedia that he has homeschooled 185 children, all of whom do exceptionally well on standardized tests.

As with Wikipedia and other online crowd-sourced resources, Conservapedia is a colloborative effort of its users and any registered user can post to the site. Schlafly is a frequent contributor to the site, and is identified as the initial author of the entry and well as the editor of the note identified above. Schlafly did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Thanks, I needed that!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here.

You are not smart enough to make up stupid lies on your own, so you rely on others to do it for you, and then you are so stupid you think those lies are true.

Here is the actual article that the blog you are quoting claims to be citing.

he 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 counterexamples, and if only one of these is true, then the theory fails:

1. The Pioneer "anomaly"
2. Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, which show a shift beyond the margin of error predicted by relativity
3. The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light
4. 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?
5. The lack of curvature in overall space as observed by measurements
6. The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominate
7. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement[2]
8. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54
9. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching
10. The inability of the theory to produce anything of value, contrary to every other theory of physics
11. The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions
12. The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe[3]
13. "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."[4]
14. The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violated causality and permit absurd time travel.[5]
15. The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[6]

Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia

While it is not entirely accurate, it is at least as accurate as a typical
Wikipedia article, and it says nothing like your lying source claims it does.

Keep up the good work.

 

[Modbert]

Odd, I see you posting what was in the article if you clicked on it. I don't see you refuting the fact they basically called it a Liberal conspiracy or that nobody "who believes in relativity continues to read the Bible."

Edit: Odd, I go to wikipedia and not one mention of Liberals in their article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity

 

[jillian]

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here.

You are not smart enough to make up stupid lies on your own, so you rely on others to do it for you, and then you are so stupid you think those lies are true.

Here is the actual article that the blog you are quoting claims to be citing.

he 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 counterexamples, and if only one of these is true, then the theory fails:

1. The Pioneer "anomaly"
2. Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, which show a shift beyond the margin of error predicted by relativity
3. The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light
4. 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?
5. The lack of curvature in overall space as observed by measurements
6. The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominate
7. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement[2]
8. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54
9. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching
10. The inability of the theory to produce anything of value, contrary to every other theory of physics
11. The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions
12. The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe[3]
13. "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."[4]
14. The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violated causality and permit absurd time travel.[5]
15. The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[6]

Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia

While it is not entirely accurate, it is at least as accurate as a typical
Wikipedia article, and it says nothing like your lying source claims it does.

Keep up the good work.

you're truly embarrassing.

 

[rdean]

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here.

You are not smart enough to make up stupid lies on your own, so you rely on others to do it for you, and then you are so stupid you think those lies are true.

Here is the actual article that the blog you are quoting claims to be citing.

he 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 counterexamples, and if only one of these is true, then the theory fails:

1. The Pioneer "anomaly"
2. Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, which show a shift beyond the margin of error predicted by relativity
3. The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light
4. 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?
5. The lack of curvature in overall space as observed by measurements
6. The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominate
7. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement[2]
8. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54
9. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching
10. The inability of the theory to produce anything of value, contrary to every other theory of physics
11. The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions
12. The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe[3]
13. "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."[4]
14. The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violated causality and permit absurd time travel.[5]
15. The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[6]

Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia

While it is not entirely accurate, it is at least as accurate as a typical
Wikipedia article, and it says nothing like your lying source claims it does.

Keep up the good work.

Not sure exactly the point you are trying to make. "Liberal theory"? Not sure what that is.

We do know for sure that Black Holes do indeed exist.

We know that in science, theories are theories because they change as data is introduced or a better of understanding of existing data is developed. Science never claims to have all the answers. But many developments have been based on those "theories".

And very recently, electrons circling atomic nuclei have been "photographed" in REAL time. Before, such behaviour was merely a "liberal" theory. I suspect it was a "liberal theory" because the event happened at Berkeley in California, a hotbed of "liberalism". Wouldn't it be grand is conservatives made some type of discovery at least once in a while? Must be terrible having to depend on liberals for everything.

What are conservative theories? There aren't any - for a couple of reasons.

The conservative philosophy is to stop change and stifle that threatening learning.

Conservatives believe in "absolutes" which is why they are so trusting of "God did it".

An interesting site with a new slant:

Einstein's theory of relativity

Relativity 4 Engineers

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Odd, I see you posting what was in the article if you clicked on it. I don't see you refuting the fact they basically called it a Liberal conspiracy or that nobody "who believes in relativity continues to read the Bible."

Edit: Odd, I go to wikipedia and not one mention of Liberals in their article:

Theory of relativity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One person who posted on the site said something weird, and his post was deleted. Yet you claim all conservatives believe that, and when I call you on it you claim I am wrong.

 

[Modbert]

One person who posted on the site said something weird, and his post was deleted. Yet you claim all conservatives believe that, and when I call you on it you claim I am wrong.

Wait, where did I said that? Oh wait, I didn't! Funny how that works.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Man, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried.

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here.

You are not smart enough to make up stupid lies on your own, so you rely on others to do it for you, and then you are so stupid you think those lies are true.

Here is the actual article that the blog you are quoting claims to be citing.

he 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 counterexamples, and if only one of these is true, then the theory fails:

1. The Pioneer "anomaly"
2. Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury, which show a shift beyond the margin of error predicted by relativity
3. The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light
4. 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?
5. The lack of curvature in overall space as observed by measurements
6. The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominate
7. The action-at-a-distance of quantum entanglement[2]
8. The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46-54
9. The failure to discover gravitons, despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching
10. The inability of the theory to produce anything of value, contrary to every other theory of physics
11. The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions
12. The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe[3]
13. "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."[4]
14. The theory predicts wormholes just as it predicts black holes, but wormholes violated causality and permit absurd time travel.[5]
15. The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered black holes despite the increase in entropy required by the Second Law of Thermodynamics.[6]

Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia

While it is not entirely accurate, it is at least as accurate as a typical
Wikipedia article, and it says nothing like your lying source claims it does.

Keep up the good work.

Not sure exactly the point you are trying to make. "Liberal theory"? Not sure what that is.

We do know for sure that Black Holes do indeed exist.

We know that in science, theories are theories because they change as data is introduced or a better of understanding of existing data is developed. Science never claims to have all the answers. But many developments have been based on those "theories".

And very recently, electrons circling atomic nuclei have been "photographed" in REAL time. Before, such behaviour was merely a "liberal" theory. I suspect it was a "liberal theory" because the event happened at Berkeley in California, a hotbed of "liberalism". Wouldn't it be grand is conservatives made some type of discovery at least once in a while? Must be terrible having to depend on liberals for everything.

What are conservative theories? There aren't any - for a couple of reasons.

The conservative philosophy is to stop change and stifle that threatening learning.

Conservatives believe in "absolutes" which is why they are so trusting of "God did it".

An interesting site with a new slant:

Einstein's theory of relativity

Relativity 4 Engineers

The point I am trying to make, for those who have trouble comprehending English (all the liberals on the board apparently fall into that category) is that the article that was being quoted is no longer present there. It was removed because it was deemed factually inaccurate and political.

Any other questions?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

One person who posted on the site said something weird, and his post was deleted. Yet you claim all conservatives believe that, and when I call you on it you claim I am wrong.

Wait, where did I said that? Oh wait, I didn't! Funny how that works.

You are correct, you did not say it, you just linked to a political blog that implied said it. You also made sure to cut and paste the parts of the blog that led to that conclusion, because you are to stupid to figure out how not to say it yourself.

 

[jillian]

Let me see if I understand what you are saying here.

You are not smart enough to make up stupid lies on your own, so you rely on others to do it for you, and then you are so stupid you think those lies are true.

Here is the actual article that the blog you are quoting claims to be citing.


Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia

While it is not entirely accurate, it is at least as accurate as a typical
Wikipedia article, and it says nothing like your lying source claims it does.

Keep up the good work.

Not sure exactly the point you are trying to make. "Liberal theory"? Not sure what that is.

We do know for sure that Black Holes do indeed exist.

We know that in science, theories are theories because they change as data is introduced or a better of understanding of existing data is developed. Science never claims to have all the answers. But many developments have been based on those "theories".

And very recently, electrons circling atomic nuclei have been "photographed" in REAL time. Before, such behaviour was merely a "liberal" theory. I suspect it was a "liberal theory" because the event happened at Berkeley in California, a hotbed of "liberalism". Wouldn't it be grand is conservatives made some type of discovery at least once in a while? Must be terrible having to depend on liberals for everything.

What are conservative theories? There aren't any - for a couple of reasons.

The conservative philosophy is to stop change and stifle that threatening learning.

Conservatives believe in "absolutes" which is why they are so trusting of "God did it".

An interesting site with a new slant:

Einstein's theory of relativity

Relativity 4 Engineers

The point I am trying to make, for those who have trouble comprehending English (all the liberals on the board apparently fall into that category) is that the article that was being quoted is no longer present there. It was removed because it was deemed factually inaccurate and political.

Any other questions?

funny...when i clicked on the link it said exactly what the O/P said....

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Not sure exactly the point you are trying to make. "Liberal theory"? Not sure what that is.

We do know for sure that Black Holes do indeed exist.

We know that in science, theories are theories because they change as data is introduced or a better of understanding of existing data is developed. Science never claims to have all the answers. But many developments have been based on those "theories".

And very recently, electrons circling atomic nuclei have been "photographed" in REAL time. Before, such behaviour was merely a "liberal" theory. I suspect it was a "liberal theory" because the event happened at Berkeley in California, a hotbed of "liberalism". Wouldn't it be grand is conservatives made some type of discovery at least once in a while? Must be terrible having to depend on liberals for everything.

What are conservative theories? There aren't any - for a couple of reasons.

The conservative philosophy is to stop change and stifle that threatening learning.

Conservatives believe in "absolutes" which is why they are so trusting of "God did it".

An interesting site with a new slant:

Einstein's theory of relativity

Relativity 4 Engineers

The point I am trying to make, for those who have trouble comprehending English (all the liberals on the board apparently fall into that category) is that the article that was being quoted is no longer present there. It was removed because it was deemed factually inaccurate and political.

Any other questions?

funny...when i clicked on the link it said exactly what the O/P said....

I provided the link to the edited page by mistake, but could see the comments on it and why it was deleted. I would cut and paste the portion I am talking about, but the site seems to be down. If you go to the actual page you would see only the portion I cut and pasted.

 

[blu]

Counterexamples to Relativity - Conservapedia



i love these people