To Neried (#5)

Concerning your comment about making observations and concrete predictions based on Einstein's science descriptions that are wrong and proven so the answer is that it is fully doable to make all kinds of observations with the intent of finding Einstein proofs, and with creative twisting of the real science, yes spouting how outward blasts from two-way energy collisions can then be described as Einstein rings. Or, something else can be "seen", but not actually in real science, to be something else.

Another example was the MIT and NIST papers that supposedly described the three energies that they found and then proved E=mc^2 was correct. The assumption was wrong because of a science error concerning how real neutrons exist, and the real science is that only two of the energies were involved. The third one about the energy it took to change a neutron to an electron is false simply because of the fact that a neutron doesn't change to an electron or anything else, but truthfully only splits the electron and proton pair apart.

So, the answer to your question is that no, predictions based on a fully wrong science theory cannot be used in real science truths. This is very close to the same impossibility situation of trying to make a horse run to win a race when the horse is factually dead.

For information also, every single Einstein "supporting evidence claim" can be shown to truly be another real science situation. And, that is the real situation involved. I will get to the thread again and there are likley more Einstein "proofs" there by now that need the real science described.