Conservapedia vs. Einstein | INFJ Forum

Conservapedia vs. Einstein

TheLastMohican

TheLastMohican

Captain Obvious
Retired Staff
May 8, 2008
6,233
496
676
MBTI
ENTJ
Enneagram
Type me.
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.
Click to expand...

http://conservapedia.com/Counterexamples_to_Relativity
________________________________________________


My faith in humanity just dropped a little.
 
...wow. Just... wow that is a debasement of science! Half of that stuff is just flat out wrong in so many ways.
 
This is a joke, right?
 
I love the "Jesus performed action at a distance" bit. You can't make this stuff up.
 
TheDaringHatTrick said:
This is a joke, right?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure. Conservapedia is a legitimate site (Wikipedia for conservatives), and the article has not been edited or taken down. It also has plenty of links to other articles on the site. But it's just so outrageous.
 
omg, no. My brain, it hurts!
 
TheLastMohican said:
I'm not sure. Conservapedia is a legitimate site (Wikipedia for conservatives), and the article has not been edited or taken down. It also has plenty of links to other articles on the site. But it's just so outrageous.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have a hard time believing it's anything legitimate.
 
...... WTF?
 
The lack of a single useful device 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 device based on relativity is the atom bomb, but that has destroyed far more lives than it's saved so it can hardly be considered useful.
Click to expand...

OMG! no they did not just say that! Has none of them used a GPS before?
 
They do realize that satellites have to make adjustments for time shifts according to the theory.... I would hope they realize that...
 
There is a tab for talking about it on the site.
 
A bit on the GPS/Useful devices:


At conservapedia's article on the Global Positioning System, one can read:
These receivers rely on precisely timing signals sent from GPS satellites, with corrections for atmospheric attenuation and relativistic effects.
GPS seems to be a useful device!
FrankC aka ComedyFan 10:53, 6 January 2010 (EST)
Great catch of a misleading statement, Frank! I've corrected it. Our theory of relativity entry explains how it did not aid the development of GPS. The repeated attempt by relativists to falsely claim credit for GPS reinforces the lack of any legitimate contributions.--Andy Schlafly 11:29, 6 January 2010 (EST) Well, you are consistent! Just another question: What's about particle accelerators? Generally, the theory of relativity is used to explain why it takes more energy to accelerate an electron from 200,000,000 m/sec to 200,002,000 m/sec than from 2,000 m/sec to 4,000 m/sec. Have you thought about an explanation for this phenomenon? Accelerators have applications beyond basic research! FrankC aka ComedyFan 12:02, 6 January 2010 (EST) Frank, I have an open mind about this, but I'm not aware of a single benefit from what you describe, nor do you identify one. Do you have an open mind about this?--Andy Schlafly 14:44, 6 January 2010 (EST)
  • Synchrotron radiation is used in medicine
  • So, may I ask again: what your explanation for the phenomenon? I suppose you are aware of the phenomenon I described above?
FrankC aka ComedyFan 15:47, 6 January 2010 (EST) Frank, inventors and doctors and engineers don't typically even bother learning relativity. Should I repeat that? Complain to engineering departments and medical schools if you think that should change. Nothing useful has even been designed or built using relativity. If you want to look and look and look for a counterexample then you'll be wasting your time. I'm not going to waste mine. This is my final reply on this topic for now. Do something logical, such as editing the Bible, and after benefiting from that experience we can revisit this issue in a month or so.--Andy Schlafly 15:52, 6 January 2010 (EST) Why does it matter whether the users of the invention learn relativity? Most users of microwaves never learn Maxwell's equations either. That doesn't mean that the laws are irrelevant to the gadget's operation. Likewise, the engineers who correct the clocks of GPS satellites may not know or care that relativistic effects are behind the clock skew. But that dodges the point that relativistic effects are real, observable, and must be corrected for in several useful inventions.--NgSmith Here's a good source: | US Navy. As for engineers not bothering to learn relativity, I think that's a mite off the mark. I'm an engineer and I had to take a class dealing with the basics of SR, and I'm just an electrical engineer. Aerospace engineers certainly deal with relativity a great deal, as do nuclear engineers. anieleGiusto" target="_blank">DanieleGiusto 00:26, 7 April 2010 (EDT) Bah... My engineering professor worked at a synchrotron at Brookhaven National Laboratory. He was in charge of a beam line for the Naval Research Laboratory. They are actually very interesting devices in that they really help with all fields of science and even fields outside of it. My one friend conducted some research with a synchrotron when doing research with fuel cells. My engineering professor studied magnetic materials with a synchrotron. Every once in a while you also find stories like this http://news.discovery.com/human/brain-human-ancestor-skull.html which actually wouldn't have been possible without the synchrotron. I'm only just scratching the surface of how useful they are. Would you like some more information? AdamYak 14:35, 10 August 2010 (EDT) Yes, I would like more support for your claim. Relativity is not even part of most engineering curricula.--Andy Schlafly 09:17, 11 August 2010 (EDT) Are not the atomic bomb and nuclear power examples of inventions based on the equivalence of matter and energy? MLS 9 Aug 10
GPS revisited

The same Tom von Flandern who is quoted in the article on the theory of relativity saying that the GPS programmers "have basically blown off Einstein", wrote in an article in 1998:
So we can state that the clock rate effect predicted by GR is confirmed to within no worse than
Click to expand...
 
TheDaringHatTrick said:
Yeah, I have a hard time believing it's anything legitimate.
Click to expand...

The more I read about it, though, the more I think it's legitimate. The site was founded in 2006 by conservative Christian homeschoolers as a school project, and is devoted to countering the liberal bias of Wikipedia. (Yes, they actually have an article detailing why Wikipedia is biased.) And they have many more articles that would raise an eyebrow. For example, I'm browsing the article on Hollywood Values at the moment.
Hollywood values are characterized by decadence, narcissism, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness, promotion of the homosexual agenda and death.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Engineers don't even bother taking general relativity courses, let alone try to build a satellite system using them.
Click to expand...

....My head hurts.
 
Oh, it is legitimate.

My christian co-worker believes the world is less than 2,000 years old and that carbon dating is completely invalid.
 
Engineers don't even bother taking general relativity courses, let alone try to build a satellite system using them.
Click to expand...

That's it! I am offended! :p
 
Website is just anti-science. It's just another piece for us "unenlightened ones" to point and laugh at.

And you know, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these people who edited this actually did study relativity. I have a good friend of mine who is going as premed, and she is DAMN smart, she will make it no doubt. Yet, she thinks evolution is completely wrong and STRONGLY believes in god. That peice of her truly confounds me so so much.
 
HOW THE HELL DO YOU SAY SATELLITES DON'T TAKE RELATIVITY INTO ACCOUNT WHEN THEY ARE PROGRAMMED TO SYNC TIME BASED ON THE LAWS OF RELATIVITY???

*breathes heavily*


Taken from an Astronomy Lecture @ http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Further, the satellites are in orbits high above the Earth, where the curvature of spacetime due to the Earth's mass is less than it is at the Earth's surface. A prediction of General Relativity is that clocks closer to a massive object will seem to tick more slowly than those located further away (see the Black Holes lecture). As such, when viewed from the surface of the Earth, the clocks on the satellites appear to be ticking faster than identical clocks on the ground. A calculation using General Relativity predicts that the clocks in each GPS satellite should get ahead of ground-based clocks by 45 microseconds per day.

The combination of these two relativitic effects means that the clocks on-board each satellite should tick faster than identical clocks on the ground by about 38 microseconds per day (45-7=38)! This sounds small, but the high-precision required of the GPS system requires nanosecond accuracy, and 38 microseconds is 38,000 nanoseconds. If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day! The whole system would be utterly worthless for navigation in a very short time. This kind of accumulated error is akin to measuring my location while standing on my front porch in Columbus, Ohio one day, and then making the same measurement a week later and having my GPS receiver tell me that my porch and I are currently about 5000 meters in the air somewhere over Detroit.

The engineers who designed the GPS system included these relativistic effects when they designed and deployed the system. For example, to counteract the General Relativistic effect once on orbit, they slowed down the ticking frequency of the atomic clocks before they were launched so that once they were in their proper orbit stations their clocks would appear to tick at the correct rate as compared to the reference atomic clocks at the GPS ground stations. Further, each GPS receiver has built into it a microcomputer that (among other things) performs the necessary relativistic calculations when determining the user's location.
Relativity is not just some abstract mathematical theory: understanding it is absolutely essential for our global navigation system to work properly!
Click to expand...
 
IndigoSensor said:
Website is just anti-science. It's just another piece for us "unenlightened ones" to point and laugh at.

And you know, I wouldn't be surprised if some of these people who edited this actually did study relativity. I have a good friend of mine who is going as premed, and she is DAMN smart, she will make it no doubt. Yet, she thinks evolution is completely wrong and STRONGLY believes in god. That peice of her truly confounds me so so much.
Click to expand...

So she effectively doesn't "believe" in biology? Without the theory of evolution, you really don't have much to do in modern biology.

I would be afraid to have her or anyone who really believes that as a doctor. Why do new flu vaccines have to be developed each year if evolution is incorrect?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back