Everything he said about GR not predicting the natural precession of Mercury's orbit [or any other body with an ellitical orbit] is a lie. The reason stafford needs for me to be a liar is because I know that his claim to tie GR and QM together is bogus.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/god/messages/27104.shtml
The part about his solution is slightly different than Einsteins means its not isomorphic with GR and its also the reason he needs to lie about what GR actually predicts [he needs GR to be wrong]. Makes alot of 'stafford sense' to claim he ties QM to GR and need GR to make a wrong prediction. Go figure.

After this he started calling me a liar with respect to what I said about his extra term. stafford is pretty pathetic in my view. These comments are pretty meaningless because nobody in the science community cares what stafford claims. And its not because his mathematical model is difficult to understand.

Have Fun Dick

• and Mike is the pathetic attention-seeking nuisance - carefuluniverse - August 4, 2003 - 05:07 UTC
• Obviously there's more to it - harvey1 - August 4, 2003 - 14:54 UTC
  • There's also less to it.... - quiet - August 4, 2003 - 18:04 UTC
• So what is this forum about? - mlevine - August 5, 2003 - 14:09 UTC
  • I guess I blew it - harvey1 - August 5, 2003 - 16:38 UTC