Talk:Farsight

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Whoa![edit]

Guys, why is there another pointless hit piece on rationalwiki? I thought we'd done with all that, see the John Duffield talk page. Especially when everybody knows that I've used the Farsight userid for donkeys years. Some even know that it started with a share-trading website called ADVFN in 2002, the idea being that I was a far-sighted stockpicker. I wouldn't mind if this article was in any way factual, but it isn't. It's a tedious tiresome barrelful of bullshit and lies. Take for example the section on the speed of light. It says nothing, and what it doesn't say is what Einstein said: "Second, this consequence shows that the law of the constancy of the speed of light no longer holds, according to the general theory of relativity, in spaces that have gravitational fields. As a simple geometric consideration shows, the curvature of light rays occurs only in spaces where the speed of light is spatially variable. Or what Irwin Shapiro said: the speed of a light wave depends on the strength of the gravitational potential along its path. Or what Ned Wright said: "In a very real sense, the delay experienced by light passing a massive object is responsible for the deflection of the light". Light curves and your pencil falls down because the speed of light varies with position. That's what Einstein said. And Don Koks, the Baez/PhysicsFAQ editor will back that up. But Lpetrich will urge you dismiss stuff like this as mere "book thumping" and "arguing like theologian", because he's a multiverse quack who peddles pseudoscience and woo, and what he can't bear is some guy like me shooting him down with robust references to papers and articles and rock-solid scientific evidence. You want more? See the virtual particles section? It slyly omits the simple little fact that virtual particles are virtual. As in not real. Duh! See this stack exchange post where former particle physicist anna v tells it how it is: "virtual particles exist only in the mathematics of the model". Whilst you're there have a look at my track record on Stack Exchange. I educate, I assist, I inform. I dispel the cargo-cult crap. I'm not some my-theory guy who says Einstein was wrong, I'm one of the good guys, and I could rip everything else Lpetrich has said below to absolute shreds. Shame on rationalwiki for letting a charlatan take the piss by abusing your website, and your ignorance, to denigrate a champion of rationality like me. Especially when he's a fat tub of lard. FFS. Deletion puhlease. --JohnDuffield (talk) 21:06, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Zapped as blatant BLP violation, fucking asinine disclaimer notwithstanding - David Gerard (talk) 23:42, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks David. All : if you want to ask me about anything to do with physics point me at some website or forum and I'll answer to the best of my abilities, with references. Then you can judge for yourself. --JohnDuffield (talk) 11:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

I don't wish to fight this deletion. I thought that my contribution was a reasonable description of the numerous flaws in "Farsight physics", as it might be called for lack of a better name. I also note JohnDuffield's use of ad hominem arguments, like his comments about my appearance. --Lpetrich (talk) 13:15, 27 November 2015 (UTC)