RTSplayer doesn't have a bio yet.
On Goosegirl's blatant lies and Slander
By: RTSplayer, 3:39 PM GMT on January 03, 2014
And I quote:
Quoting 304. goosegirl1:
This person has, in the past, shown an inability to see beyond his religeous beliefs and to objectively examine the evidence all around him. IOW, God is in control and we have no choice in the matter. I don't understand this- didn't the same God who gave us life and a home to live on, also give us a bit of wisdom and critical thinking?
For God's sake why doesn't this person ever get banned for these non-stop personal attacks?
I come back for two days and I already get a completely unprovoked slander from one of the exact same two people as usual, and I never even addressed myself to this liar before this.
This person is a congenital liar, and a slanderer, and has been corrected any number of times in the past, and refuses to change their behavior, and I'm sick of it.
In the first case, I believe in free will, which she(he?) well knows, so they're lying about that.
In the second case it's just another ad-hominem which doesn't belong here.
If you don't agree with them, it MUST be because you're too "stupid, dishonest, can't think critically, etc."
At least now I have a copy and a record, so if I get banned, I can take other action, including legal if it ever comes to that.
I am absolute sick of this site's members, and other sites members, doing this BS to anyone who questions their conclusions. It's supposed to be a scientific site, not a propaganda engine.
All I did was present evidence that shows their alarmmism is unwarranted, given past events, and for that I get a person making up blatant lies about me.
Bias and Slander at PhysicsForums dot com
By: RTSplayer, 2:26 AM GMT on January 03, 2014
This isn't politics, but nothing else matches anyway.
I used "Pollution" because they have polluted the truth, as well as reason, falsely accused me of "knowingly providing misleading information", which is slander, and I have the supporting evidence. Unfortunately, "Evo" maliciously deleted my last response to him, where I provided counter-evidence in response to his slander.
I don't know what the problem is with the Link's, but they do not lead to the right topics. Sorry.
The Morgellon's Disease topic is in their "Medical" section in "Other Sciences".
Unexplained File's Link (discovery Channel)
http://science.discovery.com/tv-shows/the-unexpla ined-files/the-unexplained-files-videos/morgellons -disease.htm
Also, since I am now banned FOREVER from the site, for the crime of defending myself against this personal attack, I can't even access the PM he sent me as proof of his slander of me, but I assure you it happened.
Second offensive thread, Topic, Relativity and the Equivalence Principle, which I did not start:
This link does not work, though it is correct.
The Relativity discussion is in "Equivalence Principle" under "Special and General Relativity".
You will find in there, not only the most insane description of the cause of gravity you will have ever seen, but also the refusal of them to admit that the explanation they give absolutely does not work, and I offered a very simple thought experiment demonstrating that.
For my troubles?
I was told by the admins that Relativity cannot be questioned because "if it was wrong someone would have proven it by now," or words to that effect.
Even after I showed him the insane consequences of his explanation, using a synchronized experiment example on opposite sides of the world, he refused to admit their explanation was self-contradictory, and they banned me because of this, plus my rebuttal of their false accusations against me on the Morgellons'.
So much for "Science".
Anybody who believes a theory is beyond contestation, or absolutely true in all respects hasn't yet understood the definition of the term "theory".
So yes, I am here calling out several admins of "PhysicsForum Dot Com" for slandering me, and making unscientific demands, and unscientific statements (r.e. the supposed infallibility of Relativity theory).
Also, "PeterDonis" for failing to comprehend that the Earth can't be moving in both directions simultaneously, to satisfy your "target moves to hit the ball," explanation in the synchronized experiment, and that the Earth cannot be moving TOWARDS a dropped ball on one side of the planet, and simultaneously be moving TOWARD a dropped ball on the other side of the planet, as you claimed the object(s) did not move at all, and that the target moved up to the object. That cannot be true in opposite directions simultaneously. You overqualified moron.
The discussion was about gravitational acceleration of a dropped object, in particular once he gave a ridiculous explanation, I constructed a thought experiment, symmetrical about the planet, in which his explanation cannot be held true under any circumstances, but he refused to admit that. In any case, his explanation is not only self-contradictory, but it still doesn't actually explain gravity at all.
The views of the author are his/her own and do not necessarily represent the position of The Weather Company or its parent, IBM.