From Conservapedia, an alternative to Wikipedia concocted by Andrew Schlafly, son of rightwing gadfly Phyllis Schlafly, to counter what he calls Wikipedia’s “liberal bias” (which apparently means anything that doesn’t conform to the conservative worldview):
“E=mc² is Einstein‘s famous formula which asserts that the energy (E) which makes up the matter in an unmoving object is equal to the square of the speed of light (c²) times the mass (m) of that body.[1] The complete form, when applied to moving objects, is E²=(mc²)²+(pc)², where p represents momentum,[2] It is a statement that purports to relate all matter to energy. In fact, no theory has successfully unified the laws governing mass (i.e., gravity) with the laws governing light (i.e., electromagnetism), and numerous attempts to derive E=mc² from first principles have failed[3]. Political pressure, however, has since made it impossible for anyone pursuing an academic career in science to even question the validity of this nonsensical equation. Simply put, E=mc² is liberal claptrap.
“In the USA, the popular Twilight Zone series featured E=mc² prominently, giving the equation greater currency with the public. The song Einstein A Go-Go by the band Landscape had a similar effect in the UK in the 1980s. But light has never been unified with matter despite more than a billion-dollars-worth of attempts, and it is likely impossible to ever do so. Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge predicts that there is no unified theory of light and matter because they were created at different times, in different ways, as described in the Book of Genesis.
“Mass is a measure of an object’s inertia, in other words its resistance to acceleration. In contrast, the intrinsic energy of an object (such as an atom) is a function of electrostatic charge and other non-inertial forces, having nothing to do with gravity. Declaring the object’s energy to be a function of inertia rather than electrostatics is an absurd and impossible attempt to unify the forces of nature, contrary to the accepted view (as predicted by Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge) that the forces of nature have not been unified. Liberal scientists assert the formula E=mc² is not limited to nuclear reactions; it applies to chemical reactions and even to the energy stored in a compressed spring[4].
“The claim that E=mc² has never yielded anything of value and it has often been used as a redefinition of “energy” for pseudo-scientific purposes by non-scientific journals. Claims can be found not only on liberal, second-tier college websites but at those of Baylor and the MIT that the equation is used in nuclear power generation and nuclear weapons (nuclear fusion and nuclear fission) and speculations about antimatter.[5][6][7]
“The Theory of Relativity has never been able to mathematically derive E=mc² from first principles (see the See also section for a derivation), and a physicist observed in a peer-reviewed paper published in 2011 that ‘Leaving aside that it continues to be affirmed experimentally, a rigorous proof of the mass-energy equivalence is probably beyond the purview of the special theory.’[8] Nevertheless, Robert Dicke – one of the most accomplished American-born physicists and experimental physicists in history – found it unlikely that the equivalence was wrong.[9]
“It has been known for a long time that radiation has a mass equivalence, which was correctly derived by Henri Poincaré in 1904,[10] but the equation E=mc² makes a claim far beyond that limited circumstance:
| “ | The equality of the mass equivalent of radiation to the mass lost by a radiating body is derivable from Poincaré’s momentum of radiation (1900) and his principle of relativity (1904). | ” |
| —Herbert Ives, 1952″ | ||
Atomic bombs are liberal claptrap, too. The mushroom clouds over Hiroshima and Nagasaki were only a bad dream.