Was Albert Einstein a Historical Fraud?

[Charles_Wong]

The only two reasons Albert Einstein has been portrayed as the poster child for Physics, Genius, and High Intelligence is because he was Jewish and most of the mass media (TV stations, news companies, newspapers, radio stations, magazines, book publishing companies, etc.) have been owned by Jews. The gentile Niels Bohr formulated quantum mechanics, but no one would recognize that name except for Physics majors. So, the only reason Einstein has developed such a big name for himself is extreme nepotism:

Was Albert Einstein a hoax?

Articles have been appearing all over the Internet asserting that Albert Einstein was a hoax. I have always been troubled by the thought that any one man, regardless of how brilliant or exceptional, could be head and shoulders above all of the other men of his time. Since I have long doubted that Albert Einstein could possibly be the greatest genius that he is made out to be, I find the theory interesting. I have also been wondering why Einstein became so famous, whereas other great scientists remained virtually unknown.

The basic idea is this: Einstein was a poor student, of average ability. He even failed seventh grade math. There was nothing exceptional about his ability or accomplishments, until he got a job as a low level clerk in the patent office in Bern, Switzerland.

[ . . . ]

Full text at http://www.samsloan.com/einstein.htm

 

[spidergoat]

The atomic bomb? He discovered the basic principle.

Lots of smart people aren't well adjusted to our society. You may think he wasn't exceptional, but appearances are deceiving.

 

[Charles_Wong]

The atomic bomb? He discovered the basic principle.

Lots of smart people aren't well adjusted to our society. You may think he wasn't exceptional, but appearances are deceiving.

Why has he exclusively been portrayed in the media as the epitome of greatness? What about Niels Bohr, Dimitreev Mendaleev, Dalton, Isaac Newton, and all those other physicists, chemists, and biologists who have played major parts in formulating theory? What about Gregory Mendel?

Pure nepotism.

 

[spidergoat]

He was a celebrity. It's not just Jews who appreciate him. I'm sure Einstein would be uncomfortable with the attention. Now it's Stephen Hawking.

 

[invert_nexus]

The masses are fickle.

And yes, Hawking is a good non-jewish example.
So is Edison.
Tesla has some fame but not as much as he deserves.

The idea behind this thread is idiotic.

 

[Zephyr]

Most of those people you mention weren't 20th century physicists, so they can't be compared. Rather look at someone like Dirac. That guy was brilliant.

Incidentally, it's unfair to credit Newton alone with calculus - a lot of those were Leibniz's ideas. Just another instance where popular history parts with the actual version.

The gentile Niels Bohr formulated quantum mechanics, but no one would recognize that name except for Physics majors.

'Fraid not, actually.

http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Bohr_Niels.html

"Bohr, although he had been christened in the Christian Church, had Jewish origins on his mother's side and so, when the Nazis occupied Denmark in 1940, his life became exceeding difficult. He had to escape in 1943 by being taken to Sweden by fishing boat."

However, Bohr didn't 'formulate quantum mechanics'. He took some of the first steps on the road, but remember that Schroedinger discovered Schroedinger's equation, Pauli discovered Pauli's exclusion principle, etc ... and the Standard Model we know and love came along much later.

 

[Nasor]

Why don't you make at least a little effort to fact-check before you post this sort of nonsense?

The basic idea is this: Einstein was a poor student, of average ability. He even failed seventh grade math.

He failed 7th grade math because at the age of 12 he started teaching himself calculus and stopped bothering to do his assigned homework, which didn't interest him. By highschool his math teacher allowed him to do his own advanced study, because the stuff he was teaching himself was beyond what the instructor could teach.

Look, why don't you try using a little critical-thinking ability here; does it makes any sense at all to you that a guy who became a physics professor could be bad at math?

There was nothing exceptional about his ability or accomplishments, until he got a job as a low level clerk in the patent office in Bern, Switzerland.

Yeah...he was just a low-level patent clerk with a phd in theoretical physics. He took a job as a patent clerk because he pissed off his professors at university, which prevented him from getting a university job right out of school.

 

[Prince_James]

Charles Wong:

Where I agree it probably is in part because he was Jewish (and the Jews are a very proud people) I think it is also because he, as far as we can tell, revolutionized physics.

No one since him has really attained near his notoriety or overall importance, however Stephen Hawking (probably because he is in a wheel-chair) is also considered a "super genius that everyone knows".

 

[Charles_Wong]

He was a celebrity.

Exactly: the media turned him into a celebrity because of his ethnic background.

It's not just Jews who appreciate him.

Exactly: the media turned him into a demigod for the gentiles.

I'm sure Einstein would be uncomfortable with the attention.

I speculate the opposite.

Now it's Stephen Hawking.

Hawking is not nearly as big a household name as Einstein. In fact, most people would not even recognize Hawking's name: but Einstein is part of common folk media: most adolescents would even recognize his name: "Hey Einstein brain . . ."

 

[Charles_Wong]

The idea behind this thread is idiotic.

I am confused. What do you mean?

 

[Charles_Wong]

Another example of Jewish nepotism is Sigmund Freud: everyone knows about him, the "great psychologist", even though his work is now recognized as 100% pseudo-science in acadamia. But the big contributors to science-based psychology, like Francis Galton, Charles Spearman, and Hans J. Eysenck (gentiles), are not recognized by anyone besides Psychology majors.

 

[Prince_James]

Charles Wong:

Pseudoscience? I am not so sure. Freud is still widely respected and many psychoanalyists remain.

In terms of therapy, I probably think either him and/or Jung are most prominent.

But yes, the Jews are nepotistic in general. They realize the benefit of helping out one's own race and religion, as a means to attain evolutionary success.

 

[Charles_Wong]

Pseudoscience? I am not so sure. Freud is still widely respected

He is widely respected in tv shows like "Frasier": the so-called "psychiatrist" who does not apply any psychiatric science or medications but instead analyzes everyone using Freud's ideas.

To get results for mental illness, people see psychiatrists for medications to put neurotransmitters in the brain back into balance. Or they see Psychologists to be tested for learning disorders or ADD or for autism and the like. But Sigmund Freud's ideas have no practical application: it's all just speculation. Freud has no mathematical models to quantify his ideas.

 

[Prince_James]

Charles Wong:

I would not call psychiatry a "science" at all. Any psychiatrist with an iota of intellectual integrity will tell you they have no clue about the science - that it works, in essence, by making you high - and that they have, ultimately, a zero cure rate.

 

[Nasor]

I am confused. What do you mean?

What he means is that anyone who does even a little research should be able to tell that the article you posted is crap. It claims that he was bad at math, when in fact he taught himself calculus at age 12. It goes on to claim "there was nothing exceptional about his ability or accomplishments, until he got a job as a low level clerk in the patent office in Bern, Switzerland." Well, most people would consider a child teaching himself calculus at age 12 to be a sign that he had exceptional ability...but even ignoring that, this article is forgetting to mention that he had a phd in theoretical physics when he published his papers. It's not like he was just some random guy.

So, clearly whoever wrote that article either
1. Didn't bother to do any research on Einstein
2. Did the research, but decided to leave out key facts in order to paint a distorted picture of him

Combine that with the fact that you shouldn't even have to do any research or actually know anything about Einstein to see that the article is full of crap (unless you're such an idiot that you don't see any logical inconsistencies with the idea of a guy who is bad at math being a professor of theoretical physics), and it's clear that this is indeed quite idiotic.

 

[Charles_Wong]

Any psychiatrist with an iota of intellectual integrity will tell you they have no clue about the science

Actually, psychiatrists will say that they don't understand the complete physiological mechanism by which certain medications work. They study the affects of various neurotransmitters, generally dopamine, norepinephrine, and seratonin, on mental conditions like ADD, depression, OCD, and anxiety. If various drugs show to improve these conditions without much side-effects, they will use it for prescription even though the complete physiological mechanism is unknown.

and that they have, ultimately, a zero cure rate.

Psychiatric medications don't cure, they mimic normal physiological mechanisms in those patients who show abnormal processes. The meds have to be taken for life. But actually, in many cases, SSRIs do cure and you can get off them.

 

[Charles_Wong]

What he means is that anyone who does even a little research should be able to tell that the article you posted is crap.

What does "crap" mean?

you're such an idiot

Do you think I have a low IQ?

But, regarding Einstein, I have no way to verify anything about him. All I know is that the Western mass media backs him.

 

[orcot]

My I ask a bid of a weird quistion?
What comes closer to the epitome of greatness jessica alba's ass or brad pitts face.

No offence but math, science in general isn't abouth looking pretty and getting your face printed on T-shirts. Do you wreally think that atomic rechearge would have benifited if Bohr or einstein had fan mail by people telling him how much they loved his shirt during his last presentation.

The somewhat celibrity status of scientist has mainly come because somehow they have writen a unique paper that fundamentley changed math in a way normal people could understand. And offcourse in steven hawkings case because some people wonder if it's some sort of robot. It's a terrible desease but onestly if a midget with 7 arms would be a top scientist then he would also get some media attention regardless of if he was the absolute best in the field.

 

[spidergoat]

Wong wouldn't like anyone Jewish to have any fame, I guess. Perhaps Einstein's achievements really are as great as people claim.

 

[przyk]

Charles Wong:

How many of these "Einstein was a hoax" articles do you think were actually published by professional physicists (you know, the people actually likely to understand the importance of the guy's contributions)?

Bashing Einstein and his work is becoming something of a fashion outside the scientific community, and it's about as credible as the opposition to evolution by creationists and the moon landing conspiracy theories.