conservapedia is hilarious, if it's not satire it's indistinguishable from it
I think it's both. Conservative politics is just a big, crowdsourced creative writing exercise anyway.
AFAIK some of the articles are genuine, some of them are satire made by trolls, and it's impossible to tell them apart
"C-decay" is a wingnut creationist proposal to explain why we can observe objects more than 6,000 light years away, even though the universe was only created 6,000 years ago. "Well, maybe light used to move faster."
Why even bother, just say everything winked into existence at the same time, including light traveling from distant objects.
Ever actually touched empty space? There's nothing there, bro. Empty space isn't real.
lets take all our modern observations and adapt them to fit into a framework of our bronze age religious assumptions
also people in the bronze age didn't take it as literally as we have decided to do for no reason
Laws of physics are only laws insomuch as we can consistently verify them in our local bit of spacetime, as we can currently perceive them. Nothing says that it can't change, we just wouldn't have any model to describe a driving mechanism for that. That said, searches for inconsistencies in this aspect of relativity are known as Lorentz invariance violations.
This does actually happen to a small degree when the light is moving inside of something that's already moving (e.g. a very fast spaceship travelling at almost the speed of light) when observed from outside the spaceship. I can't remember why but it's something to do with quantum physics (I think, I wasn't paying attention in my physics uni lectures)
I might be talking about something deeper than that but I'm not sure because I never paid attention in my physics lectures
Strictly speaking it does, in media, more strictly speaking doesn't look for the light in media as if it's slower.
We could add that m isn't static either and that in the useful undergrad formulation you got multiple terms, and we got a ton of useful results from that equation.
Light energy, yeah the cones it creates and the symmetry between dimensions of space and time are kinda rad and already without going deeper something akin to matter energy light equivalence for not exact meanings.
But if one would argue with them the best way would be to not argue but post ppb
I like how this is clearly just some dude's random questions he came up with while doing other stuff and probably told to his coworker.
Okay, this is definitely fake though right, since it's so on-the-nose. The last bullet's answer is literally E=mc^2 right?
Ahhh I wonder if they've got a problem with Einstein's work for the same reason the nazis took issue with it?
"Why hasn't the formula lead to anything of value?"
If it doesn't make more treats for :grillman: and/or :so-true: , it is worthless!
the page about nuclear energy literally uses e=mc^2 as an explanation for how it works
Since when did the logic lords have to actually know something at a peer-reviewed level? :expert-shapiro:
You learn this shit in 10th grade science.
It's in middle school text books.
Oh you mean the communist schooling system? That nest of indoctrination and leftism? /s
Does that stop the opinion leaders of the United States right(er) wing? :shapiro-gavel:
This guy is like the prime example of why home schooling is dangerous.
If I can't come to the conclusion based entirely on guessing real hard it's academic nonsense
This is called "whataboutism", a secret propaganda technique invented by the Soviet Union KGB.
So when did the idea that "logic" was more important than nuanced understanding and knowledge happen?
I know it's been around for awhile, just wondering if there was a moment that it took over.
You can unironically yell "fallacy" or "whataboutism" at someone these days, no matter the circumstance, and look like you've won an argument to the public eye. What the fuck happened lmao
So when did the idea that “logic” was more important than nuanced understanding and knowledge happen?
I think it's really about appropriating the vocabulary of rational logic and debate and drowning you in it on every subject as permanent opposition. It's a weird thing about seeking revenge for daring to point out they were wrong/illogical about something.
They do across other subjects, too. Point out one of them is a pedophile? Now they parrot a conspiracy that everybody they disagree with is secretly a pedophile. Point out an actual fascist? Now they call literally anything they don't like fascism.
We all remember that kid in elementary school, who if anyone told him any criticism at all, he'd just start accusing that criticism back at you aimlessly. It's like how a dog understands your tone of voice, but not the words.
ancient greece it really hampered western medicine for hundred of years as some dude logiced out what the human body should look like and he turned out to be wrong don't know why we started listening to these dweebs again though we had a good thing going with the scientific method
I can't believe they didn't catch the fact that E isn't even equal to m and c!!
Like wtf those are different letters of the alphabet??
How many wrong things can someone say in a single paragraph
