Strange

The first paragraph on that page says: "All of these reports have turned out either to be hoaxes or to be based on incorrect assumptions, incomplete information, or interpretation of fiction as fact." So no, they are not true.

Yes, the whole big bang model is built aroudn general relativity.

Yes. The main evidence for this is "supernova light curves"; the rate at which the output from a supernova falls is related to its brightness in a very predictable way. From this we can measure the time dilation of distant objects. As expected, this macthes exactly with the red shift.

But he did imagine (and attempt to develop) a lot of things which were not commercially viable, impractical or downright impossible. And I think that is a part of the problem with the sort of people the OP was referring to. They have an idea, they think in general terms about how it could work and then assert it as fact without even some back of the enevelope math to test the idea. (And then they get all huffy when someone suggests it won't actually work.)

Hey, it could be worse! At least you are not being ignored.

What does "speed of t" mean? Speed is distance / time so how can t (time?) have a speed. However, all observers will perceive their time passing the same rate ("1 second per second" if you must). This is their "proper time". It has been explained perfectly well. It is just, like many things, counter intuitive. Wordplay is not science. What do "1(o)" and "0(o)" mean?

a) You write the equation first and then determine the mass(es) to use. b) "Round cows": for the purposes of the OP it is almost certainly accurate enough to approximate an average mass per kid (and the effects of a meal, excretion, etc. are going to be very small, anyway).

(silly font removed) I am curious as to what this statement means. Is it: a) Your parents are your personal god(s)? b) Your personal god(s) is/are the one your parents told you about? c) Something else? Who? Your parents or your god(s)?

I don't know what you mean by "normal people" but that is absolutely not true. For the last 20+ years most of the projects I have been involved in have been almost exclusively programmed entirely in C++. Few of them have had anything to do with Windows, but I doubt that makes any difference.

Like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzball_%28string_theory%29 ?

If they are static then surely there is no speed involved, c or otherwise?

Same applies: the ratio is only Pi for a circle in Euclidean geometry. Also, the reason that light slows down when passing through a material is because the photons are continuously absorbed and re-emitted. In between, they travel at c. Universality restored!

It is, as you yourself said, the speed in a vacuum that is a constant and maximum speed.

Please explain your question!

See at the top of the page, where it says "Search" ?

It is obviously not even. And probably not prime. In fact, not prime: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=is+1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111+prime

Hoping that we might discover new science that allows time travel is speculation (at best; more like science fiction).

How would that explain the distribution of dark matter. For example, the fact that it is concentrated in and around galaxies?

Surprisingly, that is deliberate. As a con artist, you want to filter out those smart enough to see through you. These emails seem to have got worse (in terms of grammar, spelling plausibility) over time. This is, presumably, because they were wasting too much time with people who weren't dumb enough to fall for it. There are some amusing web sites where people have taken on the scammers; pretending to be gullible. They often get them to pose with pictures holding up a piece of paper with a funny caption. In some cases, they have even managed to get the scammer to send them money!

The frequencies used by cell phones are much, much higher than brain waves, which are in the range 0.5 to 15Hz. You could generate signals of this frequency easily with a microprocessor directly driving a coil, say, connected to an IO port. You could use something like an Arduino or Strawberry Pi system. Then another coil to detect signals (this would require an amplifier and A to D converter. p.s. this doesn't seem to have anything to do with genetics...

Yes. (And the radius of the event horizon grows proportionally.)

Inertia is what allows the simple conservation of momentum calculation to work. (You do need to do a vector sum to work out how much the "ship" will be diverted from its (inertial) course by the change in momentum at some angle.)

This is the old 419 scam: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_scam

Not so much circular reasoning as using the results of very well-tested theory. All sorts of things "could" be true. But you can't use that as evidence. So can rope. It is still nothing to do with gravity. I don't know what sort of explanation you are looking for. It is basically the same as electrostatic force (between charges). Feynman explains why there is a limit to how far science can "explain" things: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjmtJpzoW0o But no more than any other object of the same mass. (The theory of black holes is based on relativity, which is also the theory that explains gravity. So you can't use speculation about black holes to contradict GR. And certainly not unsupported speculation.) Citation needed. Also, it is not going to be cold for long it is about to start (if it isn't already) absorbing a cloud of gas and getting very hot. In what sense is the galaxy solid? None of that has anything to do with gravity, and certainly not as a repulsive force. That is to do with the change of density (note that cold ice floats on warm water). If gravity were repulsive, it would be the other way round. Citation needed.

It is the other way round: black holes radiate, therefore they lose mass (energy) and therefore they evaporate. (Although, in reality, they will always gain more mass than they radiate.)