zapatos

In physics, I would say that the limit is c.

What is the matter with you?

I wasn't assuming "men". What status quo are you talking about?

Can you make the argument please? Just saying it doesn't make it so. What exactly is "the human condition"? What is "emotional survival"? What is "the mammalian condition"?

We didn't limit ourselves or our location in the universe. Nature did. Be an optimist all you want, it won't change reality.

Sure, you're an optimist. I'll also point out that you are probably wrong.

That might be a bit of an overstatement. There are limits to human intelligence and ingenuity, not to mention things we are physically incapable of achieving.

Believe it or not some people have moved beyond mere survival.

That doesn't mean anything.

The age of bumper sticker level analysis.

I'm going to have to ask you to speak for yourself.

What kind of discussion were you looking to have? What do you think they would sound like?

Sorry I'm not familiar with that. Can you give a bit more detail?

How might it lead to the proof of the existence of a creator?

For God's sake...

Because Science. (Note: There seems to be a problem with your keyboard. The "?" key appears to be be sticking.) Stop already! You are just spewing a mixed salad of random thoughts and concepts you read somewhere. Think through what you are trying to say and write a cogent post.

Yeah, that speech wasn't about Confederate States relations, and it most certainly wasn't before the 1st Amendment.

George Wallace gave a speech about Confederate States relations before the 1st Amendment was created? Do you have a link to that speech?

No, your second question has absolutely nothing to do with your first, either "polite" or rude. It makes me wonder whether YOU exist in another reality.

No, the universe is not accelerating randomly.

Can you summarize for us the claims?

Which caused me to fall and skin my knee... As I hope you are beginning to see, people on this site value clear communications.

I think the answer to this is "yes". Well, maybe not a universal language, but we would have to teach the 'reader' a language prior to communicating a complicated message. Perhaps we should think about the steps that go into teaching an infant human a complicated idea. Start with baby steps and build up to more and more complicated communications. Just to be safe we should probably go through the entire process in more than one medium. For example, a visual medium in different electromagnetic wavelengths; sounds of different wavelengths, etc. Then they would have a kind of Rosetta Stone where any understanding of our lessons using one medium may help them gain insight through the other mediums.

What in God's name are you prattling on about?

The scenario you described is impossible. All that follows is therefore impossible.