Tres Juicy

Roll a dice a billion times and record the outcome of each roll (Eg: Roll 1 = 3 roll 2 = 5.... Etc.) when you finish calculate the probability of getting the outcome you just got. It will be such a miniscule probability that it could be said to be near impossible, yet it just happened. The fact is, whatever the outcome, the odds were against it.

The benefit of reduced fuel consumption would very likely be heavily out weighed by the cost of maintaining an adequate vacuum.

Why would anyone do that? What a ridiculous assertion.

It seems you have rather missed the point of this analogy. The rubber sheet in this instance is space, with the curvature as gravity. It's not possible to "drift" off of the sheet, because the sheet is space. You certainly don't need gravity acting under the sheet... Also, the is no "down hill" although gravity is mutually attractive.

This is a joke right?

No, Millikans experiment has not in any way replicated or created "anti gravity". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment Also, if gravity were an electromagnetic force moving toward the center of gravity of objects (rather than eminating from them) due to positive and negative charges this would be observable. If all objects were (-) and all gravitons (+) then objects themselves would repel each other at certain distances. Not to mention that relativity already explains why gravitation is instant, in that space is curved around massive objects...

Time does not work like this. While it is technically possible to move forward in time faster than usual there is no way to go back - the past is not a place you can travel to. When you think about it travel backward in time makes no sense at all.

No, we can't see it because it's not there

Are you trying to stop them from attracting or repelling? Repulsion can be negated.

Exactly

http://www.gunsnet.net/archive/index.php/t-3581.html There is also the fact that 666 may be the wrong interpretation anyway

No, That does not explain why matter is attracted to matter. It doesn't actually explain anything.

In other words - you cannot travel back in time to before the point in time when time travel became possible. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_timelike_curve http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space

Why, when this machne was designed did nobody think to put handles on the discs?

Given a long enough period of time a drop of water will erode any rock

Oh yeah.... I meant to say 23:59....

Exactly, it's the equivalent of thinking that the world will end at midnight because my clock will only go to 11:59....

I fail to see why people don't give credit to people for these accomplishments. Everything I have seen so far could have been accomplished with the tools available at the time - It would just be a lot harder and take a lot longer. As for alien/human interbreeding: Rubbish - you would have more success in breeding with jellyfish, at least they are from the same planet.

I want one! The rocket launcher seems to need a bit of work though

This isn't people having a go at you, this is the scientific method at work. Any claims made must be backed up with evidence - if you want to discuss a subject and you have cited evidence, you need to show it. That is the only way to have an informed discussion of the subject. Admittedly, you have posted this in speculations and that allows for more speculative threads but we cannot ignore the scientific method as it is a very powerful tool in overcoming human perception bias and getting to the facts. http://en.wikipedia....ientific_method Always cite evidence and references and don't think that because someone doesn't agree with you or asks for more evidence that they are attacking you. In science nothing is sacred, everything is to be scrutinized and picked apart. It's part of why it works so well.

Throughout the cold war the were huge propaganda campaigns, the US government were responding to soviet propaganda (where the soviets were feeding misinformation about "remote viewing" to the US). Of course the US (thinking that the soviets had already done it) wanted to show that they also had remote viewing capability, it was part of the propaganda war. Remember, they also spent a great deal of time and money trying to teach soldiers to kill goats by staring at them... EDIT: Evidence is the key here, in order to make a compelling argument you will need some. "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence"

Would you care to share this evidence mr Nelson? I certainly haven't seen anything I would call "irrefutable". Also there are many examples of governments wasting money on dead ends, the amount of money spent is no indication of the validity of the subject (only that governments are just as susceptable to bias and "wishful thinking" as anyone.

Also, how can we talk about the shape of the universe when shape is defined by boundaries? if the universe is infinite it can't have a shape can it?

I'm not looking for "an explanation which fits with my common, daily perceptions of the world" - I'm looking for an explanation that fits with physics.