The Dangers of White Supremacy Ideology in America

  • Thread starter Thread starter NoahAfrican
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the complexities of racial dynamics, particularly the perception of white individuals towards black individuals in America. It highlights the idea that while some white people may appear friendly, this demeanor does not equate to genuine respect for the black community, especially during times of societal stress. The conversation critiques the lack of counterarguments from white individuals against white supremacist rhetoric, suggesting a troubling consensus that could resurface during economic hardships. Additionally, it argues that acknowledging historical injustices is crucial for understanding current racial inequalities, and that ignoring these distinctions may perpetuate harmful stereotypes. The dialogue underscores the importance of addressing past and present racial dynamics to foster genuine understanding and equality.
  • #101
BlackVision said:
"The Bell Curve" fully addresses this as they have anticipated people who will try this approach. That you cannot just weigh SES WITHOUT taking in the consideration that people will be in high SES BECAUSE of their high intelligence that people will be in low SES BECAUSE of their low intelligence. So it's already refuted before it can even get out of the gate.
The Bell Curve is ancient and debunked.

The "Bell Curve" was written by known racists, and a long time ago, and has been debunked as such.

Like I said, find something current and legitimate (not funded by a racist organization) that has been conducted after the study I posted that shows that it is not academically accepted, or give up.

Do you accept the challenge, or do you give up?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #102
bobf said:
How were whites able to come into the area and build if predation was such a problem? What resources did the europeans have that the Africans didn't that allowed them to become more advanced?
Well, they obviously developed better building techniques, for one.
Why havn't the tribes in Africa advanced exponentially like most of the world? Why are the majority of Africans still in tribal garb?
They have probably advanced a great deal over hominids 50,000 years ago. The European cultures just advanced a whole lot more.
What resources exactly are needed in your opinion for infrastructure?
Industry begets more industry. I can't point to a single item that gauranteed European success, but building techniques, mining techniques, agricultural techniques, energy sources, and so on are all required for modern civilization.
This would be a huge over-generalization for different tribes are very different.
As I said, I have no specifics to argue. Perhaps someone else does.

- Warren
 
  • #103
Evo said:
No, you are wrong, it only applied to blacks.

No, you are wrong.



No, only to blacks.

As usual, you have no knowledge of history. You are so wrong, check it out.
Oh yes, they let Asians drink out of the fountain that said "Whites Only" Why didn't this come across my mind? Oh my oh my. As usual you have absolutely no level of logic or common sense.
 
  • #104
Evo said:
The "Bell Curve" was written by known racists, and a long time ago, and has been debunked as such.

Like I said, find something current and legitimate (not funded by a racist organization) that has been conducted after the study I posted that shows that it is not academically accepted, or give up.

Can you provide evidence that the authors were "known racists". Wasn't one of them Jewish? Were they authors racist against Asians, blacks, etc? Oh, I get it, you can label them racist and suggest everything they did was wrong because they were "racist".
 
  • #105
bobf said:
Can you provide evidence that the authors were "known racists". Wasn't one of them Jewish? Were they authors racist against Asians, blacks, etc? Oh, I get it, you can label them racist and suggest everything they did was wrong because they were "racist".
Yes, and this has all been previoulsy posted in other threads. Murray was guilty of cross burnings, there is so much more I can repost
.
 
  • #106
bobf said:
Can you provide evidence that the authors were "known racists". Wasn't one of them Jewish? Were they authors racist against Asians, blacks, etc?

The co-author of "The Bell Curve" Richard Herrnstein was ethnically Jewish. Another race realist is Arthur Hu, an American-Asian who studies ethnic differences and he concluded that East Asians were more intelligent than Whites, on average.
 
  • #107
Evo said:
The "Bell Curve" was written by known racists
Wrong but it seems to be the only attack you can use against it.

and has been debunked as such.
Wrong again. It has constantly been confirmed with newer publications such as "Race, Evolution, and Behavior"

Like I said, find something current and legitimate (not funded by a racist organization) that has been conducted after the study I posted that shows that it is not academically accepted, or give up.
Why would one have to find a newer source, when your source touches the "do not do this because it would be faulty" approach already stated by previous publications? Unless you can show that it did not do this, it is you that needs to give up.
 
  • #108
chroot said:
Well, they obviously developed better building techniques, for one.

Why?

They have probably advanced a great deal over hominids 50,000 years ago. The European cultures just advanced a whole lot more.

Why?

Industry begets more industry. I can't point to a single item that gauranteed European success, but building techniques, mining techniques, agricultural techniques, energy sources, and so on are all required for modern civilization.

Why were they able to learn these superior techniques?

As I said, I have no specifics to argue. Perhaps someone else does.

- Warren

I don't pretend to have the answers either, but I don't know how one can say intelligence does not play a role.
 
  • #109
BlackVision said:
Oh yes, they let Asians drink out of the fountain that said "Whites Only" Why didn't this come across my mind? Oh my oh my. As usual you have absolutely no level of logic or common sense.
Yes, Asians could drink from these fountains, they were not considered black. You forget BV, I was there, I was witness to this.

You don't know your history.
 
  • #110
Evo said:
Yes, and this has all been previoulsy posted in other threads. Murray was guilty of cross burnings, there is so much more I can repost
.

Do you expect me to search for a needle in a haystack? Why not provide the information here? Was he also racist against Asians? What proof do you have that he was guilty of cross burning? Was he convicted in a trial of this charge?
 
  • #111
United States said:
The co-author of "The Bell Curve" Richard Herrnstein was ethnically Jewish. Another race realist is Arthur Hu, an American-Asian who studies ethnic differences and he concluded that East Asians were more intelligent than Whites, on average.
No matter who conducts the study. Whether it is by a White, Jewish, Asian. It ALWAYS follows this order in IQ level. Jews, Asians, Whites, Blacks. ALWAYS. It doesn't matter if a Jewish person does the study, or a White person, or an Asian person, the studies have always been consistent in that order.
 
  • #112
Evo said:
Yes, Asians could drink from these fountains, they were not considered black.
Ah so the term "Whites Only" applied to Asians. Hmmmmm.
 
  • #113
BV, will you accept my challenge, or do you give up?

Very easy, yes or no.
 
  • #114
bobf said:
I don't pretend to have the answers either, but I don't know how one can say intelligence does not play a role.
I don't know why you continue to ask me questions upon questions, even when I've already explained that I have no formal education on this topic. I don't know if you think this is somehow "debunking" me, but I don't feel it is.

My basic assertion (resource availability, both physical and intellectual, enables civilization advancement) seems plausible enough; do you have any evidence that it cannot be at least partially true?

- Warren
 
  • #115
BlackVision said:
Ah so the term "Whites Only" applied to Asians. Hmmmmm.
No, it never said "whites only", you made an error in assuming something that wasn't said. Again, don't try to discuss something that you know nothing about.
 
  • #116
chroot said:
I don't know why you continue to ask me questions upon questions, even when I've already explained that I have no formal education on this topic. I don't know if you think this is somehow "debunking" me, but I don't feel it is.

I have many questions on the topic and find it very interesting. I am just looking for answers myself. My goal is not to debunk your argument, but rather to learn.

My basic assertion (resource availability, both physical and intellectual, enables civilization advancement) seems plausible enough; do you have any evidence that it cannot be at least partially true?

- Warren

What resources? What intellectual resources? I can get evidence once we define what these resources are and how they contribute to the advancement of the europeans.
 
  • #117
Evo said:
No, it never said "whites only", you made an error in assuming something that wasn't said. Again, don't try to discuss something that you know nothing about.

Evo,

I am not saying you are wrong, but I would love to see some evidence. It seems to me that white fountains would be for white people. I will admit right now that I do not know much about history (I am actually taking a course next semester), but I would love to see your evidence.
 
  • #118
Here is Arthur Hu's website: http://www.arthurhu.com/ This Asian-American not only claims that East Asians are smarter than Whites, but that Whites are smarter than Africans. He has a variety of data on his site which he uses to back up his claims. Don't know how valid any of it is, but the info. is there for those that want to go over it.
 
  • #119
Evo said:
No, it never said "whites only", you made an error in assuming something that wasn't said. Again, don't try to discuss something that you know nothing about.
LMAO! One must seriously shake his head in disbelief when debating with you.


Should Old 'Whites Only' Signs Be Displayed?[/color]

Posted March 14, 2003 -- Dallas County, Texas, commissioners decided this week to uncover "Whites only" signs above water fountains in the county records building and display them in the name of history, rather than remove them, according to the Fort Worth Star Telegram.

http://www.bet.com/articles/0%2C1048%2Cc1gb5760-6506-1%2C00.html


'Whites Only' signs win reprieve[/color]

Fading "Whites Only" signs on water fountains at the county records building will be uncovered and marked with plaques explaining their historical significance, Dallas County commissioners decided Tuesday.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/local/states/texas/5373029.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #120
"How were whites able to come into the area and build if predation was such a problem? What resources did the europeans have that the Africans didn't that allowed them to become more advanced?"-bobf
My guess is it was mostly chance, I mean one area of the world had to in all probability start flowering before others although the affects would spread outward, who is to say it was certainly due to anyone thing, it may have mostly been chance.
 
  • #121
bobf said:
What resources? What intellectual resources? I can get evidence once we define what these resources are and how they contribute to the advancement of the europeans.
Look at it simply: the first person or people to come up with the concept of agriculture radically changed his/her civilization, and gave that civilization a huge advantage over others. The first person to come up with an internal combustion engine did so, as well. Look around you -- there are hundreds of different techniques, materials, processes, and concepts all around you that someone had to invent or stumble across -- everything from number systems to financial systems to government structures to metal-working techniques to building techniques to industrial machines, each building on earlier successes.

- Warren
 
  • #122
jammieg said:
"How were whites able to come into the area and build if predation was such a problem? What resources did the europeans have that the Africans didn't that allowed them to become more advanced?"-bobf
My guess is it was mostly chance, I mean one area of the world had to in all probability start flowering before others although the affects would spread outward, who is to say it was certainly due to anyone thing, it may have mostly been chance.

Can you provide any evidence that is was chance? What information do you have on the topic? Can you define what you mean by the word chance? Wasn't China very advance at one time in history?
 
  • #123
bobf said:
It seems to me that white fountains would be for white people.
That would be what a person with common sense would say. An attribute Evo seems to lack.
 
Last edited:
  • #124
chroot said:
Look at it simply: the first person or people to come up with the concept of agriculture radically changed his/her civilization, and gave that civilization a huge advantage over others. The first person to come up with an internal combustion engine did so, as well. Look around you -- there are hundreds of different techniques, materials, processes, and concepts all around you that someone had to invent or stumble across -- everything from number systems to financial systems to government structures to metal-working techniques to building techniques to industrial machines, each building on earlier successes.

- Warren

Why were these people the first to come up with these concepts? Was it purely by chance or was it due to intelligence? Could someone who is mentally disabled with the mind of a 2 year old be able to stumble onto these inventions?
 
  • #125
jammieg said:
My guess is it was mostly chance, I mean one area of the world had to in all probability start flowering before others although the affects would spread outward, who is to say it was certainly due to anyone thing, it may have mostly been chance.
That's essentially what I'm trying to say -- what began as a very small advantage ten thousand years ago, achieved via sheer chance, would bloom into a tremendous advantage today.

- Warren
 
  • #126
chroot said:
That's essentially what I'm trying to say -- what began as a very small advantage ten thousand years ago, achieved via sheer chance, would bloom into a tremendous advantage today.

- Warren

Can you please define what you mean by chance? Can you provide anything at all to back that up?
 
  • #127
bobf said:
Why were these people the first to come up with these concepts? Was it purely by chance or was it due to intelligence? Could someone who is mentally disabled with the mind of a 2 year old be able to stumble onto these inventions?
Certainly civilization-changing concepts and inventions are due to exceptionally bright people. That doesn't mean that person's entire culture is more intelligent than the others on average, however. The majority of inventions that changed history can be attributed to either an individual, or a very small number of people.

- Warren
 
  • #128
chroot said:
That's essentially what I'm trying to say -- what began as a very small advantage ten thousand years ago, achieved via sheer chance, would bloom into a tremendous advantage today.
What impact would the intelligence level of that group have in their technological development?

And when thrown into the same atmosphere, the same society, assuming every race was equal in every single way, shouldn't it mean that every race should succeed equality in every single way as well?
 
  • #129
bobf said:
Evo,

I am not saying you are wrong, but I would love to see some evidence. It seems to me that white fountains would be for white people. I will admit right now that I do not know much about history (I am actually taking a course next semester), but I would love to see your evidence.
There are plenty of facts to prove it, I can flood you with it. It is verifiable history, tv documentation of it. The water fountains were labeled for coloreds. "Colored" people had to ride in the back of the bus. It is all a matter of history. It is a sad history. "Colored" was the word used before "black". Asians were not considered colored, nor were hispanics.

I can either gather up the information here or pm the sources to you. There are more than you can probably handle.

I have no argument with you, you want to learn. It is those that refuse to learn that I feel sorry for.
 
  • #130
bobf said:
Can you please define what you mean by chance? Can you provide anything at all to back that up?
Do I really need to define "chance" for you? I feel you're just playing games with me, and I don't appreciate it. If you have nothing to add, you should leave this discussion. If all you're going to do is ask me leading questions and criticize my admittedly ill-researched posturing, I'm not really interested in talking about this with you.

- Warren
 
  • #131
chroot said:
Certainly civilization-changing concepts and inventions are due to exceptionally bright people. That doesn't mean that person's entire culture is more intelligent than the others on average, however. The majority of inventions that changed history can be attributed to either an individual, or a very small number of people.

- Warren

Are you suggesting that intelligence does play a role in technological advancements? Would you suggest that some groups (races) of people have more intelligent people then others?
 
  • #132
chroot said:
Certainly civilization-changing concepts and inventions are due to exceptionally bright people. That doesn't mean that person's entire culture is more intelligent than the others on average, however. The majority of inventions that changed history can be attributed to either an individual, or a very small number of people.
While it is true that advancements are made by the elite rather than the average, a higher median level for intelligence by a random group, would also likely mean there would be more elites.
 
  • #133
BlackVision said:
And when thrown into the same atmosphere, the same society, assuming every race was equal in every single way, shouldn't it mean that every race should succeed equality in every single way as well?
No, because it's unlikely that one individual in every such civilization would come up with civilization-changing ideas like agriculture, money, the place system, the loom, etc. at the same time. The first culture to gain a slight advantage over the others, even by pure chance, would have rapidly advanced over the others. The people who caused such advancement were particularly gifted, and particularly gifted people certainly occur in every culture.

- Warren
 
  • #134
BlackVision said:
That would be what a person with common sense would say. An attribute Evo seems to lack.
Because you have no conception of what was "known" then. You do not know recent history. You are ignorant of what was commonly known then.

Try reading up on the subject before you post.
 
  • #135
Evo said:
There are plenty of facts to prove it, I can flood you with it. It is verifiable history, tv documentation of it. The water fountains were labeled for coloreds. "Colored" people had to ride in the back of the bus. It is all a matter of history. It is a sad history. "Colored" was the word used before "black". Asians were not considered colored, nor were hispanics.

I can either gather up the information here or pm the sources to you. There are more than you can probably handle.

I have no argument with you, you want to learn. It is those that refuse to learn that I feel sorry for.
I repeat were Asians, as well as Hispanics, allowed to drink from water foundations that said "Whites Only" I already gave my evidence that "Whites Only" signs existed completely refuting your statement that they didn't exist. But once again were Asians allowed to drink from these fountains?
 
  • #136
chroot said:
Do I really need to define "chance" for you? I feel you're just playing games with me, and I don't appreciate it. If you have nothing to add, you should leave this discussion. If all you're going to do is ask me leading questions and criticize my admittedly ill-researched posturing, I'm not really interested in talking about this with you.

- Warren

Why do you feel the need to get personal. I need to know what way you are using the word "chance" so that I can address your comments. Does chance really exist?
 
  • #137
Evo said:
Because you have no conception of what was "known" then. You do not know recent history. You are ignorant of what was commonly known then.

Try reading up on the subject before you post.

Why have you ignored all of my requests for evidence? You have said so many unsubstantiated statements and have offered zero evidence.
 
  • #138
Evo still hasn't responded to this post. What a surprise! :smile: :smile: :smile:


Should Old 'Whites Only' Signs Be Displayed?[/color]

Posted March 14, 2003 -- Dallas County, Texas, commissioners decided this week to uncover "Whites only" signs above water fountains in the county records building and display them in the name of history, rather than remove them, according to the Fort Worth Star Telegram.

http://www.bet.com/articles/0%2C1048%2Cc1gb5760-6506-1%2C00.html


'Whites Only' signs win reprieve[/color]

Fading "Whites Only" signs on water fountains at the county records building will be uncovered and marked with plaques explaining their historical significance, Dallas County commissioners decided Tuesday.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/local/states/texas/5373029.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #139
BlackVision said:
I repeat were Asians, as well as Hispanics, allowed to drink from water foundations that said "Whites Only" I already gave my evidence that "Whites Only" signs existed completely refuting your statement that they didn't exist. But once again were Asians allowed to drink from these fountains?
Yes, they were. But they did not say "whites only", did you not read what I posted?
 
  • #140
bobf said:
Are you suggesting that intelligence does play a role in technological advancements?
Of course, it would be asinine to say it didn't. Technological advancement requires intelligent individuals. What I don't feel is important is some notion of the intelligence of an entire group or race of people -- since most important inventions, again, were invented by particularly gifted individuals or small groups of people, and particularly gifted people exist in every group.
Would you suggest that some groups (races) of people have more intelligent people then others?
No, that's entirely my point. :smile: You don't need to invoke some generalization about Europeans being smarter than Africans to explain their present-day lead in technology. It can be explained neatly, I think, by exponential technological growth seeded by largely chance events that happened a very long time ago.

- Warren
 
  • #141
bobf said:
Why do you feel the need to get personal. I need to know what way you are using the word "chance" so that I can address your comments. Does chance really exist?
I feel that you have been getting personal here for a while, as you're not really discussing anything with me. You're just asking me leading questions, and I find it somewhat annoying.

- Warren
 
  • #142
I realize my speculation is weak but I guess what I mean is that if civilization had really flowered and spread from Asia then everyone might say, "well that figures they are smarter", if it had mostly been born from Africa people would probably say "well that figures they came from a harsh environment", that's not to say that Europe was the main place of all technology and science but as Chroot said success add to success and probably accelerates them and predispose people to all the bad and good of them such that the Americans moving into Alaska had a severe impact on the Native popullation by introducing alchohol for example. I do know that there are slight genetic differences from one group to another but so slight that it's hard to say if they truly make most or even some of the perceived differences, I mean if Asians are more intelligent then why didn't they spark the industrial revolution or go to the moon?
 
  • #143
chroot said:
Of course, it would be asinine to say it didn't. Technological advancement requires intelligent individuals. What I don't feel is important is some notion of the intelligence of an entire group or race of people -- since most important inventions, again, were invented by particularly gifted individuals or small groups of people, and particularly gifted people exist in every group.

No, that's entirely my point. :smile: You don't need to invoke some generalization about Europeans being smarter than Africans to explain their present-day lead in technology. It can be explained neatly, I think, by exponential technological growth seeded by largely chance events that happened a very long time ago.

- Warren

Can you start to explain it by "It can be explained neatly, I think, by exponential technological growth seeded by largely chance events that happened a very long time ago." I am all ears. Also, can you please define what you mean by chance?
 
  • #144
BlackVision said:
Evo still hasn't responded to this post. What a surprise! :smile: :smile: :smile:
What post? I've responded to your posts, you have not responded to mine.
*************
BV, will you accept my challenge, or do you give up?

Very easy, yes or no.
 
  • #145
chroot said:
I feel that you have been getting personal here for a while, as you're not really discussing anything with me. You're just asking me leading questions, and I find it somewhat annoying.

- Warren

Can you please point out the posts in which I got personal? I am asking you questions and I thought this was a discussion board. :smile:
 
  • #146
jammieg said:
I realize my speculation is weak but I guess what I mean is that if civilization had really flowered and spread from Asia then everyone might say, "well that figures they are smarter", if it had mostly been born from Africa people would probably say "well that figures they came from a harsh environment", that's not to say that Europe was the main place of all technology and science but as Chroot said success add to success and probably accelerates them and predispose people to all the bad and good of them such that the Americans moving into Alaska had a severe impact on the Native popullation by introducing alchohol for example. I do know that there are slight genetic differences from one group to another but so slight that it's hard to say if they truly make most or even some of the perceived differences, I mean if Asians are more intelligent then why didn't they spark the industrial revolution or go to the moon?

Very good questions. Are you suggesting that all races are equal in regards to intelligence and if so, can you supply any evidence?
 
  • #147
No actually you do if you're going to completely deny the fact that, likely the majority was Jews, were left with absolutely nothing after WWII. No money, no possessions, no place to go.

Let's not forget, when the blacks were freed...well, they were free.

A lot of the Nazis while on the verge of being defeated or after defeat, freed the prisons where they left the Jews. They left the Jews there in cages, to starve and die ("Why We Fight", Band of Brothers). I would hardly call that an advantage.

Wrong again, they were far worst off.

Maybe are friend Evo, should take a look at "Why We Fight". Then afterwards, after she sees how the Jews were...'free', she can come back and continue the discussion.

Maybe he will turn out ok? Are you implying that he is not ok now? What is wrong with him in your opinion? hmm, not a personal attack??

Yes, I've noticed another member of the PF staff throwing personal attacks around as well. In fact, I was just finished being insulted by a member of the PF staff. When I snapped back, I received a warning. I guess the unwritten rule here is "Everything the PF Staff says even though offensive, will not be held as an insult. Members are not allowed to refute without inane repercussions."


Wrong again. The vast majority of Asians today come from the poor Asian countries such as China, Vietnam, etc. who come to America with nothing.

What bothers me even more is that NoahAfrica, Evo and Chroot act as if African-Americans are all poor and disadvantaged. Asians however, marched into the continent with bags of money, fancy diplomas and classy jobs/houses waiting for them. It's absolutely absurd.

It relates to this topic as a whole so it's completely on topic. Or are you trying to suggest that when we try to debate something we shouldn't use something similar as examples?

It's a conspiracy against me. They hate me because I'm French Canadian. :rolleyes:

But seriously, I get a lot of disrespectful comments around here. I've been here longer than some of the mentors have, yet you're free to insult me but not them? :confused:

No, only to blacks.

No, it's basically always been "white superiority" and Asians have suffered many of the same things African-Americans have, but people have taken less notice to it.

It's always, "White-only restaurants" - "No colors". The fact that less Asians were around during that time makes it less noticeable.

I don't pretend to have the answers either, but I don't know how one can say intelligence does not play a role.

Because it does.

No, it never said "whites only", you made an error in assuming something that wasn't said. Again, don't try to discuss something that you know nothing about.


I'll have to agree with her on this one. It didn't say, "Whites Only".

It said, "No Colors". Again, the movie Remember The Titans (which was based on a true story). It was always, "no colors". Asians weren't welcomed to waltz into a restaurant where blacks were allowed, and neither were the other minorities.

Asians were not considered colored, nor were hispanics.

Yellow isn't a color? Native Americans (reds)? Even Mexicans were discriminated against. This is pure common sense.

Take the KKK for example. Their famous slogan, "If you're not white, you're not right."

Why do you feel the need to get personal.

Obviously you haven't talked to Chroot before.
 
Last edited:
  • #148
Evo said:
What post? I've responded to your posts, you have not responded to mine.
*************
BV, will you accept my challenge, or do you give up?

Very easy, yes or no.

Whats the challenge to BV again?
 
  • #149
Evo said:
Yes, they were. But they did not say "whites only", did you not read what I posted?
Get this. Evo still believes "Whites Only" sign didn't exist despite the fact that I provided evidence to the contrary. You have lost the credibility to show facts, you have lost the credibility of honesty.


Should Old 'Whites Only' Signs Be Displayed?[/color]

Posted March 14, 2003 -- Dallas County, Texas, commissioners decided this week to uncover "Whites only" signs above water fountains in the county records building and display them in the name of history, rather than remove them, according to the Fort Worth Star Telegram.

http://www.bet.com/articles/0%2C104...506-1%2C00.html


'Whites Only' signs win reprieve[/color]

Fading "Whites Only" signs on water fountains at the county records building will be uncovered and marked with plaques explaining their historical significance, Dallas County commissioners decided Tuesday.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram...xas/5373029.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #150
bobf said:
Very good questions. Are you suggesting that all races are equal in regards to intelligence and if so, can you supply any evidence?
bobf, I would suggest that you read up on this latest information first.

Here is the evidence you are asking for.

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=38546

posts 21 & 25
 
Back
Top