User talk:Der alte Hexenmeister

Archive 1

The facts of the original disagreement have been kindly archived by Schaefer.

Einstein's theory of relativity.

At this time there is some controversy concerning Relativity as Einstein wrote it.

For clarification refer to:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

which is the original paper translated into English and these following links:

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Rocket/Rocket.htm

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm

The viewpoints expressed on those pages are my own and are not of a neutral point of view. It is encumbent upon others to present the facts as lucidly and as unambiguously as possible, with facts agreed by consensus. After all, facts cannot be ambiguous. Persons/editors wishing to discuss the matter should do so on the appropriate page and not here.

Der alte Hexenmeister 14:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome

Androcles -

I did the archiving for two reasons:

That is the proper way of clearing out a talk page. (Under Wikipedia guidelines discussion should never be removed except to archive it.)
It keeps others from reverting this page against your wishes.

If I may make a suggestion: You may want to move (or copy) the above business on Einstein's theory to your user page. Just

hit the "edit this page" tab,
select the section and do a Ctrl/C (to copy it),
hit the red "user page" tab,
paste the section into the edit window that you will get, and
save it.

This will place your concerns on your "front door", making them more prominent, and keeping them from getting lost in the clutter here. --EMS | Talk 15:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User and talk pages

Please don't leave comments on peoples userpages. Use their talk pages instead. Edits like this [1] will get you a block if repeated William M. Connolley 19:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok, User: Connolley (Admin). You go ahead and do whatever you wish. Your threat of excommunication has no effect upon me, history has adequate precedent of tyranny, censorship and blatant bullying. Unlike Galileo, I do not fear you or the Pope, Pontius Pilate, Herod, Ceaser, Hitler, Saddam Hussein or any of your ilk.

You did not have the common courtesy of responding to my communique, reproduced below, and that adequately states my opinion of you. Schaefer is yet another bully and enemy of science. If it is the policy of wackypedia to ignore the voice of the heretic "even if he can prove" the LIES, then I want no part of wackypedia's religion.

Freedom of the press goes to those that own one, but you cannot own the internet. Excommunicate me from your clique as you will, I shall never be excommunicate from my fellow man. With this missive, I excommunicate you.

Copy of email sent to User:Connolley (Admin)

> Connolley: > > Check the FACTS on the discussion page of > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity > where the prats Price and Schaefer are "pratting around" (your terminology). > > Price has inadvertently admitted his error: > "When you learn the difference between a lie and a mistake" -- Price. > > Schaefer expressly admits to being an honest prat: > "To be honest with you, we are both having some fun with you." > -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Der_alte_Hexenmeister > > I can quote my sources, Connolley. > > You claim to be a mathematician. A mathematician would recognise > that a constant velocity isn't a reversal of direction. > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF > That's my non-neutral PoV, which I can state openly on my own page. > My neutral PoV is different. Light travels from A to A in time t'A-tA = 0/0 > in Einstein's relativity. > > > "I've blocked you for 24h for 3rr / disruption. Please try to contribute > productively William M. Connolley 07:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC) " -- Connolley. > > Please try to be neutral and learn what "productive" means. I'm not trying to > rewrite > relativity in wikipedia, I can make my own comments on my own web page, and I > do. > But some prats are liars, maliciously misleading the public, having fun, > either through ignorance or stupidity. > > Do you see a contradiction between these two statements, Connolley? > "These two postulates suffice for the attainment of a simple and consistent > theory "--Einstein, > reference : http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ > "This is the strength of special relativity, that it can be derived from such > a single, basic principle" -- wackypedia, reference: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Theory_of_relativity > > Wackypedia COULD be a useful vehicle for the dissemination of knowledge, but > not if it contains LIES. > > I do not believe you to be impartial. > "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely" - Lord Acton. > Are you a mathematician, Connolley? I have my doubts. I think you more > concerned with political correctness than truth. In short, you are (in your > own words) pratting around. > > > Der alte Hexenmeister ist: > Sorcerer Androcles Dumbledore, Headmaster, hogwarts.physics > school for zauberlehrlings. > "One muggle's magic is another sorcerer's engineering" > > http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/ >

"Capital Punishment, a penalty regarding the justice and expediency of which many worthy persons -- including all the assassins -- entertain grave misgivings." -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"

May your god go with you (and rot).

Der alte Hexenmeister 01:24, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(P.S. I am not nice, I say it the way it is. Any problems with formatting are the problems of Wackypedia's pathetic 1980 vintage and 1960 quality text editor, I pasted and copied the email ) -- Androcles, the old Sorcerer.

____

POV tag vandalism

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, as you did to twin paradox, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. It is also noted that you vandalized principle of relativity.

Your use of the {{POV}} tag is inappropriate. To quote from WP:NPOV#Undue_weight again:

a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it's true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not.

It's time for you to stop. --EMS | Talk 04:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Significant minority"

On my talk page, you wrote:

I name Paul Langevin, Herbert Dingle, [and] Bertrand Russell as prominent adherents to the SIGNIFICANT minority POV.

Let's see: You are naming three dead men who espouse the now all-but-dead idea that relativity is invalid. IMO, you have not made your case that your viewpoint is significant today in the least. --EMS | Talk 14:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care for your opinion, Schaefer, it is prejudiced. You are a bigot and a liar. That is a personal attack, have me blocked (or not bother, I block myself). I will not be silenced, there are better media than wackypedia and its inconsistencies. You and you clique are a joke, you'll never be a journalist, scientist or mathematician as long as you have a hole in your arse. I refuse to play your silly rules games with you any more. Signature refused.

"I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do. "-- Robert A. Heinlein