🚀 go-pugleaf

"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in message 
news:143065ptd6hndvnojkif3nrmva802mpmtd@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2009 10:12:41 +1000, "Whoever" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>"Henry Wilson, DSc" <hw@..> wrote in message
>>news:v1bv5518gnic5melr2l3s20s27qqshm992@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 18:12:54 +1000, "Whoever" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>Shame that that is refuted by Sagnac.
>>>
>>> Sagnac fully supports BaTh.
>>
>>Stop lying Henry
>>
>>> It plainly refutes SR
>>
>>Stop lying Henry
>>
>>> because its analysis requires
>>> that the rays move at c+v and c-v wrt the source.
>>
>>You don't understand the anlaysis .. and you get yours totally wrong
>>
>>> If you cannot understand simple diagrams that is not my fault.
>>
>>It is your fault that you don't understand,, because it has been explained
>>to you countless times
>>
>>Stop lying Henry .. and a fraudster deliberately trying to fool people 
>>into
>>believing your theory is correct.  Get over it .. you're flogging a dead
>>horse.
>
> You obviously know nothing about SR.

Stop lying Henry

> According to SR, the rays move at c+v and c-v wrt the source.

Yeup

> Have a look at the SR analysis.

I have .. you obviously don't understand it, or you would not be making 
false claims about it.  Well. if you were an honest person you wouldn't. 
However, it is well known that you are a liar.

> How does that happen?

I've explained it to you before, more than once, as have others.  You'll 
only lie about it if I explain it again.