Fallacy of Relativistic Doppler Effect

On Mar 23, 11:33 am, PD wrote:
On Mar 23, 1:10 pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:

Given the wording, it is not very clear what is going on. It is only
subject to where your imagination can take you. shrug

So let's see. You cannot understand what is stated in the single
sentence above. And so you say that anyone who claims to be able to
read English sentences is in fact just making that up.

You indeed possess vivid hallucinating interpretations. shrug

This is one of your cheap shots. shrug

It's not a cheap shot if it's true, Koobee. You can't understand the
single sentence that has been quoted from it, you could not even FIND
in the paper where it was located and had to ask someone where it was,
and so it's no wonder that you've never read the paper, let alone
understood it.

Wow! A cheap shot on top of another. shrug

You're exposed, Koobee. Your WHOLE HISTORY on s.p.r has consisted of
nothing but bluster and empty twaddle.

Another cheap shot. shrug

You've just confessed that you don't understand where Doppler shift
comes from, even in sound waves, despite your floundering attempts to
understand it using either Galilean or Lorentz transforms. This utter
incompetence on YOUR part you blame on others.

More cheap shots. shrug

The bottom line is that using the same method the Galilean transform
predicts no Doppler shift even for sound waves. Thus, deriving the
Doppler shift using the method pulled out of his ass by Einstein the
nitwit, the plagiarist, and the liar is just plain wrong. Want to try
to weasel your way out of this one again or just stomping on your feet
throwing ****s as cheap shots? Come on, little man. Yours truly
dares you. shrug