On Tuesday, May 10, 2016 at 9:54:29 AM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Tue, 10 May 2016 03:54:51 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

On Sunday, May 8, 2016 at 6:28:24 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 8 May 2016 14:00:33 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
wrote:

On Saturday, May 7, 2016 at 6:11:57 PM UTC-6, Chris L Peterson wrote:

What claim? NG appears to be a perfect theory. It can be derived from
GR as the limiting case for a non-accelerated frame and zero velocity.

But actual moving bodies do not have zero velocity, and acceleration is a real
phenomenon - and Newtonian mechanics purports to describe the behavior of
accelerated bodies.

No, but a limiting case can still be a perfect representation of
reality.

NG doesn't even explain Mercury's orbit.

Who said it did?

If NG can't explain Mercury's orbit, then it can hardly be a perfect theory.