1. The Need of New Approaches - Kritische Stimmen zur ...

Chapter 9: The Thought Experiment
With this we have the instruments for a comparison of the happenings in “theoretical physics” with the current,
socially relevant processes in our country. We will now compare the relativity catastrophe with several current
scandals:
2012
(1) with the fraudulent loans of the professional bankers;
(2) with the Telekom bugging affair;
(3)with the corruption affairs at Siemens; and
(4) with the behaviour of the government in the final nuclear-waste disposal site “Asse”.
We will, as usual, identify the points of agreement and the differences and we will make a decision as to the
cheaters’ league in which the physicists are playing. And in view of a period of 85 years of successful suppression
and denial of the criticism, they can be expected to belong to the best of their discipline.
All of the following circumstances was reported at great length in our press, so that the circumstances can be
considered as being generally well-known and as representing no news any more. The presentation of the scandal
makes do essentially with the state of things in September 2008. The further developments have produced other
wonderful new blossoms, which, however, do not contribute anything to the problems.
1. Comparison of the Relativity Catastrophe
with the Banker Scandal of Fraudulent Loans
The core of the scandal: insecure mortgages were given the highest security rating, AAA, by the rating agencies
so that all of the banks and capital collecting points could deal in them and sell them without any fears.
The fraud element is finely thread and is generally so unimaginable that even a number of professional bankers
are unable to see the fraud or the risk factors in their books - professionals!
The more intelligent bankers do see through the fraud with the loans and organize, as a precautionary measure,
a further fraud: they hive off these loans in special companies, that not longer appear in the balance sheets of the
banks as owners. This sifting of banking business out of the balance sheet is the second fraud as a subsequent
precaution against the first tone. One will see how well it functions.
The first case of fraud is exposed. The transacted loans lose their highest rating, AAA, and are immediately
worth much less.
Once the first swindle has been exposed, the “special companies” collapse and must now unfortunately be
included in the books of the owning banks after all. The second swindle then becomes known and has protected
against nothing.
As an additional feature at a lower level, in the USA at the end of 2008 the Madoff snowball system is exposed.
And a sum of 50 billion is missing. The fraud is investigated by the House of Representatives. The fund manager
Markopolos had drawn the attention of the SEC (the supervisory body!) to serious inconsistencies at Madoff for 9
years and now speaks out: “I gave them the biggest snowball system of all time, gift-wrapped, but somehow they
just didn’t take the trouble to investigate it properly or thoroughly.” (FAZ, 6.2.09)
The Comparison.
(1) The most interesting parallel to the relativity catastrophe is the double swindle. First the physicists threw
their critical minority out of the scientific sphere and then they spread the lie that there was no criticism of the
theories of relativity anymore. The public, of course, was not to be permitted to learn anything about the throw-out
of the critical minority, which is why the first swindle was concealed from the public and a second swindle was
organized to secure the first.
All future cheaters can learn something from this, namely that one swindle is often not enough.
The second swindle did not function for the bankers, because money transactions always have to be settled,
sooner or later. The relativists’ second swindle has functions right up to the present day. The relativists are quite
simply the better cheaters.
(2) A further parallel can be seen in the inconceivability of the methods employed. Just as no one could imagine
that the bankers, with their foul loans, would shoot themselves in the foot (and then others), in the same way almost
no one today can imagine that an entire branch which presents itself as a rational, “academic science”, could throw
its critical minority unceremoniously out of this “science”.
15
G. O. Mueller: STR