Moontanman

Is this pertinent? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Directive

Purpose? They are the result of plate tectonics, which is the result of dissipating heat from the center of the earth built up from gravity compression and radioactive decay.

Again, not you do not get your own facts... And this has something to do with what? The same could be said for a bullet entering the window with both of us in the same room, meaningless drivel... I don't think you have the slightest understanding of relativity... they had their own bibles? Interesting but still a nonsequitur.. This really makes no sense, I'd like to try and give you as much credit as possible. Can you elaborate? Are you suggesting I am incapable of original thought? No, they stood on the shoulders of giants, your analogy makes no sense.. I would say you can believe invisible unicorn farts are the forces of the universe, you would still be just as far as you are now into a deep lack of burden of proof... I'll give another chance, read this and see if you understand how wrong you are... Ok, I read it wrong, sorry for the inference...

I think this thread has digressed into the twilight zone but I would like to add one thing, maybe nothing, but When I was a kid, we had a science club, we did lots of sciency stuff, built and flew rockets, manufactured colorful explosions with powdered metals, we build bridges over small streams, yes we used math. One thing that was stupid in hindsight was our fascination with mercury, a man who lived up the road shared our fascination and he had a thick glass jug that contained one gallon of mercury, we all pilfered a glass stoppered bottle from our schools chemistry lab and filled it half full of mercury and kept it in our rooms, it was our club symbol or something, but we were all exposed over and over to mercury. Now 45 years later of the five of us all have had, have, or have died of cancer of one type or another, may be irrelevant but i often wonder if our exposure to the metal had anything to do with our health being compromised. Don't play with the stuff kids, it's really dangerous...

argumentum ad populum? Who is in the minority or the majority has no bearing on who is correct... It's not up to me to prove you wrong, you are making an assertion, the burden of proof lies solely with you! Then you should take back your assertions and admit you have no basis in reality for your assertions. Again the burden of proof lies with you not me... Again an argument from ignorance Again the burden of proof lies with you my only assertion is that i don't know Again an argument from ignorance.. Again the burden of proof lies with you! You can define a goat as a duck but it will not make the goat a duck... Argument from ignorance or burden of proof, pick one... What are they? Do you have any evidence of them doing what you say? unless you provide evidence then yes you did make stuff up! Again, changing the definition of something doesn't make you correct. Just your opinion, everyone has an opinion, you are welcome to yours but you cannot have your own facts! You change those truths every time you bend them to your own opinion... Again you are welcome to your own opinion but you cannot have your own facts. Sad and you have my condolences but meaningless in this conversation... You have no idea why I do not believe in god but more to the point you do not know my inner thoughts at all. My reason have to do with burden of proof, something no religion has. Meaningless drivel in this conversation More meaningless drivel and a large dollop of proselytizing... meaningless word salad Faith has no place without evidence to support it and yes there is a difference, GR and QM has real world evidence and application, belief gods does not...

You should get used to people making fun if you tell very many people this Belief, I was trying to get you to see why the concept of a god is silly with no evidence. May not? You want to base this on an argument from ignorance fallacy? So are computers, your point please? That is agreeable but you are leaving out complexity and the speed of light would put a big cap on communication of something as big as the universe... Here is where you run off the rails, you have no proof or even evidence other than an argument from ignorance. So far you have to provide anything but your assertions as evidence this is the equivalent of making stuff up... So far everything you have asserted is made up because not of it is supported by any evidence other than your belief, just because you think something should be one way or want it be one way or another is no reason to think it is that way,

Why does any of these things need a purpose? it's quite possible the way things are is just the way things have to be. It could be completely random or at some point we might discover why these things have to be the way they are. all we can honestly say is how they not why they are. It's like the water in a puddle waking to find the puddle fits itself perfectly, surely some other intelligence must have made the hole fit the puddle perfectly? Anytime you can reasonably replace the word god with "magical sky fairy" and get the same result you have seen why there is no need of the concept of a god..

If you read the bible you would have seen that the going free after seven years only applied to hebrew slaves. All the others were property as long as they lived and could be passed down to your children. So yes it was a life sentence...

That brings me back to sending a ftl signal to a planet 100 ly away and then return the signal would the signal arrive 200 years in the past

So FTL transmission is possible if both subjects are in the same frame of reference? BTW the comments section in that link are confusing the whole idea...

There are a couple of credible films about what would happen if we were invaded but i have yet to see a credible reason why we would be invaded...

Would sending a message faster than light necessarily be sending the message back in time? Let's say we have a method of sending an instantaneous message (most extreme case I am assuming) We send that message to a star 100 ly away and then they return the message to us. Would the message be received 200 years in our past or is this just a mathematical quirk? What i am trying to say is would it be a real effect? Or is it just what the math indicates much like infinity or a singularity. The reason i ask is that we can see that a signal going faster than light would still take time, positive time, at least in the receiving and re-sending part and I have read about singularities just being a mathematical quirk and they may not actually exist and that infinity is more of a mathematical concept than something we would expect to be real. The ftl signal would get to the destination before a photon and would be received before a photon leaving the source would be but i see no reason other than a mathematical oddity to assume it would go backwards in time. In fact you would have to accept that the past is as real as the present for this to happen.

I am, as many of you who know me might guess, fascinated by the Alcubierre drive or Alcubierre metric but what some of you might not know is that it works at slower than light speeds and this might be the most important part of the theory. While there is some doubt about whether or not FTL is possible even with the Alcubierre metric it could, even at more rational speeds, open up the solar system to us in a way that is impossible now. Even .10 c would be a vast improvement and contrary to what we see in science fiction a spacecraft that is basically very similar to the Enterprise in Star Trek (not one mission and disposable) would be very valuable for exploring and or exploiting our own solar system. ​In fiction you might get the idea that our solar system is small and not worth exploring but the reality is that the solar system is brobdingnagian in human terms and we can't go fast enough to explore much of it in manned spacecraft. While we probably won't interact with aliens there are hundreds if not thousands of bodies in the solar system worth visiting. ​Colonization and exploitation of the solar system would be greatly helped by a spacecraft utilizing Alcubierre drive and even slower than light travel would be a big advance if it was a significant percentage of light speed.

The premise of independence day was a non starter, the resources they were supposedly coming for are widely available in places like the asteroid belt or the kuiper belt, why fight another species for that which you could get free? The idea that aliens would want our planet IMHO is silly, we have evolved to fit our planet, the earth is not some special oasis that all alien life would gravitate toward. Alien life would evolve to fit their own planet, no reason to think all life bearing planets would be enough like earth for us to live there or for them to live here. A minor trace element like mercury would be enough to make a planet uninhabitable by humans. I have been reading where at least some scientists think the earth may be unique in having such a thin atmosphere, an earth sized planet should have a much more dense atmosphere. If this is true then aliens from a planet with a 10 bar atmosphere might have a rough time adapting, other trace elements like CO2 could render a planet useless. The variables are endless and each species would be adapted to a specific set of conditions unlikely to be repeated anywhere else.. I can show you a magnetic field, can you show me a spirit?

Non nuclear EMP is used by the military to knock out electronics. I am not sure if it has any effect on humans. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

I would suggest visiting a doctor specializing in child behavior..

Good to hear Brontosaurus is back in the house!

No, the rate of mutation hasn't increased it's recessive genes being expressed due to inbreeding of small populations, also many deer hunters, especially if the own the land they are hunting on are less inclined to shoot odd colored deer. I've talked to several land owners who feel this way.

Best UFO footage ever! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8cnHktRYMA

Since coal was formed 300 million years ago I think the metaphor is somewhat strained... http://www.fe.doe.gov/education/energylessons/coal/gen_howformed.html

It depends a lot on how you mean this question, if you are wondering if there stars that have temps different than our own Sun then yes most definitely. Some stars are so hot they are blue 30,000k our own sun is much cooler, about 6,000k http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification Saturn's moon Titan might have an example of life not as we know it. http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/2015/02/life-not-we-know-it-possible-saturns-moon-titan

Sunshaker, you do realize a planet could lack dry land and still not be a "globule" of water.. right? If you add enough water to the earth all dry land would be covered and we would still have our planet under the water. I'm not sure i understand, coal and oil were both created long before there were dinosaurs. I see no way an underwater species, like an octopus, could acquire technology beyond the stone age, without fire I think it would be a no go situation... Metals like native gold or silver might occur and maybe even batteries made up of them but using electricity underwater would seem to be self defeating at best. Possibly there are other routes to technology I cannot think of but generating electricity might be the first step in that direction...

https://youtu.be/M60gmXoWIaw

Oops https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=803285256426705