Finite Relativism Disproof

On Sep 21, 4:26*pm, doug wrote:
Phil Bouchard wrote:
doug wrote:

[...]

I guarantee you that no one will plagiarze it. FR is
a joke not worth retelling.

Ok well keep GR and live happily.

Yes, everyone will keep GR.

That's probably the first reliable prediction you've made.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

PD wrote:


Repetition of the same error never makes the error go away.


- GR threw in the towel against FR

GR cannot do that. It is a theory, not a sentient being.

- FR is a perfect representation of the Universe

Except that it makes wrong predictions.
- You have not shown any experiment that contradicts FR

GPS, center of the earth, muon lifetime, ... How many more
do you want?


[...]

Phil Bouchard wrote:

PD wrote:


And what other features are exhibited in your fantasy world? Or does
that depend on dosage?


You not willing offering the credits FR deserves

It deserves zero. Even replying to you is giving you
much more time than your delusions warrant.

in a attempt to
silently plagiarize it will not stop evolution.

I guarantee you that no one will plagiarze it. FR is
a joke not worth retelling.

PD wrote:

Repetition again?

FR is a perfect representation of the Universe.

Phil Bouchard wrote:

doug wrote:

[...]

I guarantee you that no one will plagiarze it. FR is
a joke not worth retelling.


Ok well keep GR and live happily.

Yes, everyone will keep GR.

PD wrote:

FR does not meet the minimum requirements of a scientific theory.
Until it does, there are no credits warranted, Phil.

According to you the mathematical part has no importance.

PD wrote:
On Sep 21, 4:26 pm, doug wrote:
Yes, everyone will keep GR.

That's probably the first reliable prediction you've made.

PD just instantaneously turned against Doug.

On Sep 21, 4:25*pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
PD wrote:

Repetition again?

FR is a perfect representation of the Universe.

Yes, it appears it is just repetition. So if you repeat it enough
times, you win?
Try repeating 2+3=9 until people stop replying. Will that make 2+3=9?

On Sep 21, 4:26*pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
PD wrote:

FR does not meet the minimum requirements of a scientific theory.
Until it does, there are no credits warranted, Phil.

According to you the mathematical part has no importance.

I didn't say that either. I told you mathematics is not the ultimate
criteria.

And it is still true that FR does not meet the minimum requirements of
a scientific theory, Phil. Having mathematics in it is not sufficient.

On Sep 21, 4:30*pm, Phil Bouchard wrote:
PD wrote:
On Sep 21, 4:26 pm, doug wrote:
Yes, everyone will keep GR.

That's probably the first reliable prediction you've made.

PD just instantaneously turned against Doug.

I don't think so, Phil. Groping?