More Gravity Fun

In an attempt to get an explanation of the apparent inconsistency in Autodynamics explained in a previous post I have sent the following message to their discussion board:

Hi All
As you are probably aware I have been looking at your
Autodynamics work, I freely admit that I just don't get
your velocity sum equation, but for now I think a more
obvious problem with Autodynamics is its treatement of
E=mc^2. I wonder if you could clear up my confusion?

In Autodynamics it is stated throughout the website
that E=mc^2 is assumed to be true, it is then used in
the derivation of the Autodynamics kinetic energy
equation, which is used to calculate the Autodynamics
solutions for problems like the Compton effect etc. This
is fine as far as I can tell, E=mc^2 is pretty securely
demonstrated.

The problem is in Autodynamics treatment of gravity,
the pico-graviton is calculated, apparently using
perihelion advance of Mercury, to be a massive particle
travelling at superluminal velocities. This itself is not
a surprise, all theories of push gravity tend to have very
superluminal particles. The problem lies in the fact that
even in Autodynamics, it is impossible for any massive
object to travel faster than the speed of light if E=mc^2
is correct.

So how can you reconcile the fact that to explain gravity
Autodynamics requires E=mc^2 to be false, but to explain
particle phenomena it requires it to be true? You claim
both predictions as significant successes of your theory
but they are mutually exclusive.

I hope you can see that this is an interesting an important
point and try to explain it without too much bluster.

It apparently has to be moderated by the group, so we'll just have to see how open they are about criticism. I'm quite happy to be proven wrong, we shall see.