syntax252

Cough, ahhhh, done by people of Euorpean decent????

And you call unsubstiantiated allegation "evidence?" Does it matter at all to you that the 9/11 commission found that the things that TT quotes are bullshit? Well I think I can. He has accused the President of the United States as being complicit in the worst attack against civilians on American soil in the history of the nation. He, in another forum has charged that the Vice President, the Sec. of Defense and the assistand Sec of defense "may have" organized the antrax letters being sent to members of our Senate. And he has repeatedly cited the for-profit work of an off the wall nut case as being somehow more reliable than the findings of the 9'11 commission, a panel sworn to investigate the circumstances surrounding the events of 9/11. If you think that that sort of input is worthy of courtesy and respect on this forum, then you just get right to banning, but, just as long as I am here, I will call a spade a spade and this guy is, in my opinion, a weapons grade JERK!

Perhaps not, but they were certainly the best at implementing those traits to their profit.

Greed and ruthlessness.

Well you know, that is the way I understood it too. Or that the ether did not act as a carrier for light waves as does the air for sound waves?

And this was supposed to prove........what?

Oh, I agree to that. But one either believes that something is true, or one does not. I think that most people who are willing to say that time is mallable, really don't believe that it is, they just don't know how to disagree. Kinda like a lot of Christians not believing that Jesus was who he said he was, they are just too afraid of censure to argue about it.

I am not saying that time is not mallable. I am only saying that I do not think that it is mallable. Different realities for different folke, doncha know.

Well, not quite. How did they determine that there was no difference?

Yes, it was easy. It is also close to what I have been doing for the past 50 years or so. I am suggesting that if I take on a position of "oh, why yes, of course time is mallable, because Einstien said so" that I would be little more than a parrot, or a mechanical recording device that simply repeated everything that I was told regardless of whether I could understand it or not. IMO, we already have plenty of those in the world.....

None of the above are of any concern to me. Now as to the book, let me ask you a question: If, as I outlined in a previous post, a panel was established for the express purpose of investigating an event, (9/11) and that panel came back with a report that stated that certain people did not play a role in the planning of or the carrying out of the event, yet someone who has little or no expertise in investigating matters of this magnitude, writes a book and claims that the afore-mentioned panel was full of shit and that only by reading his book could we find the truth, and he wrote this book based on not interviewing any of the principal players of the event--would you think that his book was relevent to the question? Especially since the rest of the established media essentially ignores him and his book? Neither would I. Then we cast around to see if there are other examples in history that come adorned with the same sort of for-profit activity, and we find that indeed there are! The Kennedy assassination, how many books and movies were made about that one? How much soap and how many Chevys were sold on the unfortunate fact that a man had his brains blown out? Pearl Harbor--I have read many accounts about how Roosvelt and Churchill got together and planed that one just to get the US involved in WWII. The internet is stuffed to the extent of it's bandwidth with cock-a-ninny conspiracy theroies about any sibject that one can imagine. Do you think that I--or you--necessarily has to read all of these bullshit theories before we can disregard them? Neither do I.

Oh, I have an interest in relativity all right. I just do not feel compelled to accept something as absolute fact until I can understand why it is fact and all the other questions that this fact creats are answered.

Perhaps, but evidence can be misinterpreted. Does the Sun come up because the rooster crows? Or is it the other way around.

You will have to elaborate on that one a little bit.

Boys this is all very interesting, but I really think that when 5 minutes goes by here on Earth, 5 minutes goes by everywhere else in the universe. It might not seem like 5 minutes, and certain mechanical measuring devices may read different, but 5 minutes has passed just the same.

But how does this prove that time itself changed? You say that the clocks were protected from environmental affects, but obviousely they were not protected from weightlessness, nor were they protected from the effects of the speed of their orbit. All I am saying is that things like radiation decay just might have another explaination besides time dialation. When these clocks are brought back to Earth, which time frame are they in? Earth's or theirs? When and how did they revert back to an unchanged time frame?

Well really, who is this Ruppert guy anyway? He has been committed to a mental institution, he is known to make rather off-the-wall conclusions, he hs no standing in the ligitimate press and he has not even interviewed any of the principal players in the 9/11 event. All he has is a following of gullible people who are already pre-disposed to believe anything that is critical of their government and especially if it is critical of the Bush administration. He is just another jerk who wrote a book. Big deal! When the rest of the media starts to pick up on his allegations, then it might mean something, but so far, he hasn't gotten much traction for his conspiracy theories--now has he? Newtonian: Perhaps Coventry would be the better for it if I did!

This is what I am asking: When we find differences is the way clocks measure time, why do we assume that it is time itself that has been altered, and not merely the clock? Is it impossible to think that perhaps there are physical circumstances whereby a clock would be induced record time at a different rate?