Skip to content

September 23, 2011


Scientific Consensus Refutes Deniers of Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity

by RogueOperator

In a CERN lab, so-called scientists are denying Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, which states that no particle can travel faster than the speed of light. Au contraire, they say, the neutrino can:

The science world was left in shock when workers at the world’s largest physics lab announced they had recorded subatomic particles travelling faster than the speed of light.

If the findings are proven to be accurate, they would overturn one of the pillars of the Standard Model of physics, which explains the way the universe and everything within it works. […]

[R]esearchers at the CERN lab near Geneva claim they have recorded neutrinos, a type of tiny particle, travelling faster than the barrier of 186,282 miles (299,792 kilometers) per second.

These fellows at the “European Organization for Nuclear Research” are the same scam artists who recently claimed global warming is primarily driven by the sun and cosmic rays, rather than man’s activities. Heresy!

And now they are looking to overturn one of the fundamental building blocks of modern physics, the upper limit constant of light speed, all in the name of scientific progress? Double heresy!

Perhaps these troublemakers haven’t gotten the memo that real science is defined by UN panel consensus; not falsification, as Popperian fanatics believe.

One potential benefit of this rogue research is that these supposed scientists have identified a potential catastrophe in the making that demands swift government action.

Manmade particle acceleration is threatening the fundamental laws of physics and the results could be the end of the universe as we know it. Thus, the UN is proposing a Particle Acceleration Tax…

Read more from Environmentalism
8 Comments Post a comment
  1. Sep 23 2011

    Yes, we must never find anything that travels faster than light because that is the concensus!

    How ironic that consensus science is now the deniers of new science.

  2. Sep 23 2011

    All science is a guess that we don’t have the technology to prove wrong yet. They have proven the law of gravity wrong and create excuses like ‘ether’ (?sp) to correct the problems with it. Yet they insist AWG is sound? Funny how the only NON Affirmative Action school grad just quit the global warming community recently. Now they have a bunch of undesirable scientists left…

  3. Sep 23 2011

    Just wanted to let you know that I nominated you for the Versatile Bloggers award. Please visit my site Boudica BPI for instructions on how to pick it up.
    Bob A.

  4. Reaganx
    Sep 23 2011

    =not falsification, as Popperian fanatics believe.=

    Actually Popper got it a bit wrong, He fought against positivism but his theory of falsification is as unviable as positivism.

    • Sep 23 2011

      There are certainly flaws to Popper’s ontological and epistemological views of science, but I hold that his method of falsification is more useful than consensus science, which is totalitarian-friendly. Of course, there’s no need to follow Popper into his extreme skepticism.

  5. Mad Mike
    Nov 22 2011

    We’re either in or entering into a new dark age of science, where instead of mainstream religion(bare with me I’m not attacking religion per se, it was those that headed it being the cause) being the cause it’s actually politics! I said to anyone who would listen that the politicizing of the global-warming issue would affect other fields of science and it seems that I’m correct. God help us all!

    • Nov 23 2011

      Stay tuned for a huge story along these lines coming soon.

  6. timeisabsolute
    Jun 19 2013

    Einstein’s “theory” of relativity is grotesque nonsense (cf., it is based on internal contradictions and therefore invalidates itself, eliminating the need to consider any experimental tests whatsoever. This can be shown at once and one doesn’t need any further discussion, leaving the impression that there might be anything deeper to it. There isn’t. It must be removed from science in its entirety as soon as possible. 


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Note: HTML is allowed. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to comments

%d bloggers like this: