Quote:
Originally Posted by forrest noble
There is no attitude behind their statements; generally they are polite.
Well versed commentators who can add valuable comments to either side of an argument:
abcdefg
<snip>
RusselT
I feel privileged to have any or all of these posters on any ATM thread that I propose or take part in and many other individuals not mentioned.
|
abcdefg's recent ATM thread saw him repeatedly using a single sentence from a chapter to assert something that was in complete contradiction to what the chapter as a whole was saying, apparently based on a willful misinterpretation of a word in that sentence. He repeatedly used that as the sole answer to a question after being informed about this error. You'd be badly off it you where relying on him to lend credence to an idea.
RussT, in his recent ATM thread, has admitted/been shown not to understand the very fundamental concept of relative velocity as used by mainstream physics and is currently being educated in it.
It your idea has anything to do with relativity, adding either of these to the mix will only serve to make things a hopelessly confused muddle.
__________________
‘To those who regard “crime fiction” as some sacred icon which must follow a rigid formula, I will always be the man who writes 18-syllable haiku.’
Trying to make sense of computers,
The Error Log.