zapatos

What makes you believe that the earth is not travelling at near light speed?

What do you make of this situation where only you are able to uncover facts and understand reality, and all the physicists of the world are apparently dolts?

Looks to me like a species of penisaurus.

I would describe 'normally' as the way you experience time right now. No different. You are at this moment travelling through space at near light speed from the FOR of something else. Do you feel as if you are moving in slow motion?

Most definitely not.

Then go after him for quote mining. I don't see how wanting to find a reason to not like Obama suggests Rigney is a racist. That goes well beyond hyperbole and is a presonal attack. Ad hominem attacks are reminiscent of the worst of the right wing. It is no better coming from the left.

Do you feel that everyone who doesn't like Obama is a racist who has stirred bile and an obscured mind, or are you only being insulting to Rigney? No one else besides Obama has the integrity of a real politician? Pshsht. You are as biased as those on the right you ridicule.

No, you implied the Judeo-Christian creation myth didn't belong in this conversation. As this is the Religion forum, this is exactly where it belongs.

Lighten up. It belongs in this conversation because it is his thread and it is in the Religion forum. It is not up to you what can and cannot be discussed.

No one is giving it preference except you. Somecallmegenius mentions four options and specifically said "I also welcome any other theories of creation you may have".

Sure, that sounds like a great way to address this. I have no strong feelings about any kind of memorial at all. I only objected to the callous attitude toward those who do have strong feelings. No need to get in a snit about it. Your latest post better conveyed the core of your concerns that your earlier posts. I was simply pointing that out. It wasn't meant to counter anything. It was an attempt to get you to see things from the point of view of those affected. You mean big significant events such as ping pong? At the risk of annoying you again, had you presented your argument this way the first time I would have had less reason to object to your statements. You lose credibility in an argument when you fail to acknowledge what is important to the other side. "It's just 11 dead athletes", and "To give it so much attention degrades other atrocities ...", and "something that is actually significant", and " if you wanna worry about something, there's your much bigger issue", and "...a couple of dead athletes in Munich...", shows you do not hear or do not care what they think.

I think you would win more converts to your position if you argued like you did in this post instead of presenting yourself as uncaring and unsympathethic to the suffering of others. I somehow don't think we'd hear you talking about how insignificant the death was, and how honoring the dead person minimized the death of others, if that person was your murdered child, who died so someone else could make a political statement. Whether the person dies by the hand of a terrorist or in a flood, whether alone or in a large group, it is still significant to someone. To dismiss their pain and suffering because they are only one (or a few) and weren't lucky enough to die in a manner you find worthy of honoring, seems heartless. Please don't translate my empathy for others to a lack of concern about invasion of countries, limits to freedom, censorship, and invasion of privacy. I made no demands that this terrorist event be "remembered forever", but I feel confident that 60 seconds of silence during a 17 day event will have zero impact on my freedoms and privacy.

Some big people know about parthenogenesis too! Sorry, couldn't help myself.

You are beginning to sound like you read a book on what Germany did to its culture (and how great the ancient Greeks were) and it influenced you so much that it colors everything you see, hear, or think. I cannot think of a single thread you have participated in (possibly even a single post) that did not reference Germany, Nazis, and/or Greece. Surely there must be other influences in the world. Surely it is at least possible that you are wrong, and not every other person on this site.

It is generally accepted that there is no aether or preferential FOR.

I honestly cannot follow your logic. You have on many occassions spoken out against people's empathy for others simply because there is something bigger to have empathy for. You say we degrade the atrocities of bigger events by taking notice of smaller events. 'Why remember the 11 athletes when we can remember the thousands dead in Japan?'. Why stop there? Don't remember the thousands dead in Japan, if you wanna remember something, remember the hundreds of thousands dead from the 2004 tsunami that killed so many in Indonesia! No, wait. Don't remember that, remember the China floods of 1931 when millions died. Then again, that is puny compared to AIDS. Or the Spanish Flu. Or Black Death. Can we only show empathy and have remembrance for the biggest death toll of all? And sorry for harping on this, but should we not spend time caring for animals when there are people to care for? Should we not work on making a better shovel when we could be making a better surgical tool? Should we not be experimenting on the LHC when people are starving? There is room for empathy, effort, remembrace, etc. for all things, great and small. I think you do a disservice to others by minimizing their feelings and efforts.

Then yes. But remember that from the perspective of the person in the space ship it is the person 'at rest' on earth or the theoretical observer 'at rest' on any near object in space who appears to be moving in slow motion. As an aside, I found your use of the term "...literally virtually..." to be interesting.

We have not yet found all of the rules of the universe, and likely never will.

No. The expansion is believed due to two things: 1. Dark energy as mentioned by IM Egdall, and 2. The continuing motion that originated with the Big Bang as mentioned by Airbrush. The motion due to the Big Bang is what predominated early, and motion due to dark energy is presumed to dominate the continued motion (and acceleration) now.

From whose perspective? From whose perspective? It is important because without it the theory of Relativity would have been falsified.

Can I have a citation please? I've never heard of electrons, atoms and protons travelling at the speed of light.

I think you are going to have to define 'time travel'. To me and my clock, I 'travel' forward in time at the rate of one second per second. Doesn't matter if I do it on earth or in a fast rocket. Time does not change for me. How you see me from your FOR has no impact on me, and you cannot consider one frame 'normal' and the other 'slow'. You don't 'gain' time in the journey. As far as I can tell, relativistic speed has nothing to say about time travel.

That's one way of looking at it. You could also say that the twin on the ground spent his time in "fast motion".

People fear loss of control. If I have a gun I am in control. It doesn't matter if you have one or not because I have one and have some control over my situation. If no one is allowed guns, even though it may be likely that you do not have one when you show up, I know that I definitely do not have one and so I have limited control. (Edit: Actually I am not necessarily referring to myself. I didn't buy a gun until I saw the mess in New Orleans after hurricaine Katrina.) I remember a study not too long back (can't find it though) that found that many people who fear flying stated they would be less fearful if they could be in the cockpit. Didn't matter that they knew nothing of flying, they just felt that if they were up there then they would have some control.

I'm having a hard time finding anything specific but I did find this comment: http://www.bulletproofme.com/Ballistic_Protection_Levels.shtml#No_Vest_Bullet-PROOF