🚀 go-pugleaf

"Henry Wilson DSc ." <HW@..> wrote in message 
news:jfoti59o0j97uie5s1lmtjlbhv37ekpjnv@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 20:35:45 -0600, Tom Roberts 
> <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
>
>>Henry Wilson DSc wrote:
>>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 19:52:46 -0600, Tom Roberts 
>>> <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>> There are numerous measurements of the
>>>> speed of light emitted by moving sources, and they all obtain c within 
>>>> their
>>>> resolutions. Modeling the speed of light emitted by a source moving 
>>>> with speed v
>>>> as c+kv, experimental measurements require k<2*10^-9, SOLIDLY refuting 
>>>> emission
>>>> theories such as Newton's:
>>>> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html#moving-source_tests
>>>
>>> Such lab experiments have alternative explanations.
>>
>>To date, nobody has presented a coherent and self-consistent theory that
>>explains ALL of the experiments within the domain of SR, other than SR 
>>itself
>>and theories equivalent to it [#]. Certainly YOU have not done so.
>>
>> [#] In the sense that they are experimentally indistinguishable
>> from SR.
>>
>>
>>> The only real test of the emission theory is [...]
>>
>>... not NEARLY sufficient. For emission theory to be accepted, there are
>>HUNDREDS of experiments which must be addressed, not just one.
>
> Well, over the last couple of years I have addressed most of them....and 
> found
> they are perfectly compatible with BaTh.

See, that bastard has his head up his arse.
The fuckin' "domain of SR" is non-existent, he'll only look at
data that agrees with his religion. If he doesn't like it, he snips.