Honest Albert, dishonest "later writers" (according to John Stachel
and John Norton):

http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-B-Z-J.../dp/0817641432
Einstein from 'B' to 'Z', John Stachel
p. 179: "Are there any common features to Einstein's mentions of the
Michelson-Morley experiment? Yes: Without exception, it is cited as
evidence for the relativity principle, and is never cited as evidence
for the principle of the constancy of the velocity of light."

http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/1743/2/Norton.pdf
John Norton: "In addition to his work as editor of the Einstein papers
in finding source material, Stachel assembled the many small clues
that reveal Einstein's serious consideration of an emission theory of
light; and he gave us the crucial insight that Einstein regarded the
Michelson-Morley experiment as evidence for the principle of
relativity, whereas later writers almost universally use it as support
for the light postulate of special relativity. Even today, this point
needs emphasis. The Michelson-Morley experiment is fully compatible
with an emission theory of light that CONTRADICTS THE LIGHT
POSTULATE."

Dishonest Albert uses the Michelson-Morley experiment as support for
the light postulate of special relativity:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...66838A 639EDE
The New York Times, April 19, 1921
"The special relativity arose from the question of whether light had
an invariable velocity in free space, he [Einstein] said. The velocity
of light could only be measured relative to a body or a co-ordinate
system. He sketched a co-ordinate system K to which light had a
velocity C. Whether the system was in motion or not was the
fundamental principle. This has been developed through the researches
of Maxwell and Lorentz, the principle of the constancy of the velocity
of light having been based on many of their experiments. But did it
hold for only one system? he asked.
He gave the example of a street and a vehicle moving on that street.
If the velocity of light was C for the street was it also C for the
vehicle? If a second co-ordinate system K was introduced, moving with
the velocity V, did light have the velocity of C here? When the light
traveled the system moved with it, so it would appear that light moved
slower and the principle apparently did not hold.
Many famous experiments had been made on this point. Michelson showed
that relative to the moving co-ordinate system K1, the light traveled
with the same velocity as relative to K, which is contrary to the
above observation. How could this be reconciled? Professor Einstein
asked."

Dishonest Einsteinians "almost universally" use the Michelson-Morley
experiment as support for the light postulate of special relativity:

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~djmorin/book.html
Introduction to Classical Mechanics With Problems and Solutions
David Morin, Cambridge University Press
Chapter 11: "The speed of light has the same value in any inertial
frame. (...) This is a rather bizarre statement. It doesn't hold for
everyday objects. (...) The truth of the speed-of-light postulate
cannot be demonstrated from first principles. No statement with any
physical content in physics (that is, one that isn't purely
mathematical, such as, "two apples plus two apples gives four apples")
can be proven. In the end, we must rely on experiment. And indeed, all
the consequences of the speed-of-light postulate have been verified
countless times during the past century. As discussed in the previous
section, the most well-known of the early experiments on the speed of
light was the one performed by Michelson and Morley."

http://www.lacosmo.com/relativite.html
Christian Magnan: "Le fait que la vitesse de la lumière soit
indépendante du système de coordonnées dans lequel on la mesure a eu,
on le sait, une importance décisive dans l'invention de la théorie de
la relativité. En montrant que cette vitesse de la lumière ne
dépendait pas de la direction dans laquelle elle était mesurée,
l'expérience de Michelson et Morley (l'article en décrivant le
résultat date de 1887) a remis en cause toute la physique classique.
Ces physiciens utilisèrent le vaisseau terrestre comme un repère en
mouvement. La Terre tourne en effet autour du Soleil à la vitesse
d'environ trente kilomètres par seconde. Selon la loi de composition
des vitesses façon Galilée les vitesses devaient s'ajouter de sorte
que la vitesse de la lumière, poussée en quelque sorte par la vitesse
de la Terre, aurait dû être plus grande dans le sens où notre planète
avance dans l'espace que dans le sens opposé ou dans le sens
perpendiculaire. Mais en répétant les mesures tout au long de l'année,
le long de l'orbite terrestre, Michelson et Morley ne détectèrent
aucun effet de vitesse. Il fallait construire une théorie dans
laquelle la valeur de la vitesse de la lumière s'avèrerait
indépendante et de la direction et du repère choisi pour la mesurer."

http://www.pourlascience.fr/ewb_page...vite-26042.php
Marc Lachièze-Rey: "Mais au cours du XIXe siècle, diverses
expériences, et notamment celle de Michelson et Morley, ont convaincu
les physiciens que la vitesse de la lumière dans le vide est
invariante. En particulier, la vitesse de la lumière ne s'ajoute ni ne
se retranche à celle de sa source si celle-ci est en mouvement."

http://philosophie.initiation.cours....-48902702.html
"A la fin du XIXème siècle, les travaux de deux physiciens, Michelson
et Morley, mirent en évidence le constat suivant : quelque soit le
référentiel utilisé, la vitesse de la lumière est constante, ce qui
est en totale contradiction avec la vision classique ayant cours à
leur époque."

http://www.sciences.univ-nantes.fr/p...at/51relat.htm
Claude SAINT-BLANQUET, Maître de conférences: "Compte tenu des
résultats de l'expérience de Michelson et Morley, on doit renoncer à
la transformation de Galilée."

http://www.amazon.com/Faster-Than-Sp.../dp/0738205257
Joao Magueijo: "I am by profession a theoretical physicist. By every
definition I am a fully credentialed scholar-graduate work and Ph.D.
at Cambridge, followed by a very prestigious research fellowship at
St. John's College, Cambridge (Paul Dirac and Abdus Salam formerly
held this fellowship), then a Royal Society research fellow. Now I'm a
lecturer (the equivalent of a tenured professor in the United States)
at Imperial College. (...) A missile fired from a plane moves faster
than one fired from the ground because the plane's speed adds to the
missile's speed. If I throw something forward on a moving train, its
speed with respect to the platform is the speed of that object plus
that of the train. You might think that the same should happen to
light: Light flashed from a train should travel faster. However, what
the Michelson-Morley experiments showed was that this was not the
case: Light always moves stubbornly at the same speed. This means that
if I take a light ray and ask several observers moving with respect to
each other to measure the speed of this light ray, they will all agree
on the same apparent speed! Einstein's 1905 special theory of
relativity was in part a response to this astonishing result. What
Einstein realized was that if c did not change, then something else
had to give. That something was the idea of universal and unchanging
space and time. This is deeply, maddeningly counterintuitive. In our
everyday lives, space and time are perceived as rigid and universal.
Instead, Einstein conceived of space and time-space-time-as a thing
that could flex and change, expanding and shrinking according to the
relative motions of the observer and the thing observed. The only
aspect of the universe that didn't change was the speed of light. And
ever since, the constancy of the speed of light has been woven into
the very fabric of physics, into the way physics equations are
written, even into the notation used. Nowadays, to "vary" the speed of
light is not even a swear word: It is simply not present in the
vocabulary of physics. Hundreds of experiments have verified this
basic tenet, and the theory of relativity has become central to our
understanding of how the universe works."

http://www.pourlascience.fr/ewb_page...ussi-26285.php
Alexandre Moatti: "L'expérience de Michelson et Morley, en 1887, en
est un premier exemple. Par la mesure des interférences obtenues lors
de deux trajets lumineux perpendiculaires (l'un dans le sens Nord-Sud,
l'autre dans le sens Est-Ouest, celui du déplacement terrestre),
l'expérience aurait dû mettre en évidence sur le trajet Est-Ouest une
vitesse de la lumière diminuée de la vitesse de rotation de la Terre
autour du Soleil. Il n'en fut rien. Ce résultat négatif a été expliqué
en 1905 par la théorie de la relativité restreinte d'Einstein, qui
stipule notamment que la vitesse de la lumière dans le vide est une
constante absolue, indépendante de l'observateur et de son mouvement.
L'expérience de Michelson et Morley a été répétée depuis un siècle
avec des dispositifs de plus en plus précis, et a toujours donné un
résultat négatif, confirmant la théorie de la relativité."

http://www.erudit.org/culture/libert...66/59825ac.pdf
Hubert Reeves: "Historiquement, tout a commencé lorsque, vers 1880,
deux physiciens, Michelson et Morley, obtinrent après une expérience
célèbre un résultat parfaitement irréconciliable avec les théories de
la physique contemporaine. L'existence de ce résultat provoqua dans le
monde de la physique un malaise qui dura plusieurs années. Nombre de
physiciens s'efforcèrent de réconcilier la théorie avec l'expérience,
certains allant même jusqu'à supposer l'existence d'une conspiration
de la nature contre les physiciens. En 1905, le jeune Einstein reprit
le problème à neuf, et proposa d'établir en principe fondamental de la
physique l'inéluctable et malencontreux résultat de Michelson et
Morley. Sur ce principe on rebâtirait toute la physique, et on
réévaluerait les idées acceptées à la lumière de leur compatibilité
avec ce principe. De là est née la théorie de la relativité. Ce
principe est le suivant : si un observateur mesure la vitesse de la
lumière provenant d'une source lumineuse, il trouvera toujours la même
valeur, soit 186,000 milles à la seconde (vitesse qu'on appelle la
vitesse c) quel que soit l'état de mouvement de la source. En d'autres
mots, que la source s'approche on s'éloigne de moi, sa lumière vient
toujours vers moi avec la même vitesse. Que cet énoncé, en apparence
anodin, puisse avoir des conséquences assez étranges, on le verra
facilement par l'exemple suivant : je considère une source qui
s'éloigne de moi avec une vitesse voisine de c (la vitesse de la
lumière) ; à première vue, je suis porté à raisonner comme ceci : la
lumière qui vient de la source vers moi aura peine à me ratrapper et
me parviendra grandement ralentie. Notre principe, basé sur
l'expérience, affirme que la vitesse de la lumière est toujours, là
comme ailleurs, égale à c."

http://www.hawking.org.uk/index.php?...64&It emid=66
Stephen Hawking: "Interestingly enough, Laplace himself wrote a paper
in 1799 on how some stars could have a gravitational field so strong
that light could not escape, but would be dragged back onto the star.
He even calculated that a star of the same density as the Sun, but two
hundred and fifty times the size, would have this property. But
although Laplace may not have realised it, the same idea had been put
forward 16 years earlier by a Cambridge man, John Mitchell, in a paper
in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Both Mitchell
and Laplace thought of light as consisting of particles, rather like
cannon balls, that could be slowed down by gravity, and made to fall
back on the star. But a famous experiment, carried out by two
Americans, Michelson and Morley in 1887, showed that light always
travelled at a speed of one hundred and eighty six thousand miles a
second, no matter where it came from. How then could gravity slow down
light, and make it fall back."

http://205.188.238.109/time/time100/...of_rela6a.html
Stephen Hawking: "So if you were traveling in the same direction as
the light, you would expect that its speed would appear to be lower,
and if you were traveling in the opposite direction to the light, that
its speed would appear to be higher. Yet a series of experiments
failed to find any evidence for differences in speed due to motion
through the ether. The most careful and accurate of these experiments
was carried out by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley at the Case
Institute in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1887......It was as if light always
traveled at the same speed relative to you, no matter how you were
moving."

Pentcho Valev