People who believe in FTL travel are stupider than theists

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction, but for some reason a lot of atheists seem to think one day we'll achieve faster than light propulsion. These people are retards many order of magnitude more retarded than any theist.

Why? With God there's absolutely no evidence to suggest that one can't exist. With faster than light travel you are going against the very basics of science. There is ample evidence to suggest that this is something that is entirely impossible.

If you believe faster than light capabilities are more feasible than God, you don't deserve to live. Kill yourself.

[SIdt]

I agree that we should assume something is true until experimental exceptions are provided, but with the teeniest tiniest chance that maybe there might possibly be a way to travel even slightly faster than light, I'm not going to pass judgement on the few qualified physicists that think there might be.

The same applies to god, except I think that with the teeniest tiniest chance s/he does exist, s/he deserves no respect from me. If solid proof of his/her existence is provided then I'll admit I was wrong about their non-existence, but I won't worship them.

[mizled]

I believe it's possible to travel faster than god.

[Miley Highrus]

It kind of makes me depressed that it is impossible to ever go across the universe.

[SIdt]

Originally Posted by Unwires

It kind of makes me depressed that it is impossible to ever go across the universe.

Cheer up. Unless you are a static point in space-time, you do it every day.
There's always mind-uploading to fall back on. That is at least theoretically possible.

[Mirana]

Science is always being proven wrong and re-written. I'm not saying there can't be a God, sure some being might have come here and put a couple eggs and shit and left. Why not? we do that stuff all the time in labs.

But I'm just saying you are full of shit, and don't know very much about physics besides what you quickly skim through during your cough syrup highs.

[Shrike]

It's impossible with our current understanding and technology. That doesn't mean it's never going to be possible. Science is a fluid thing, you can't just put a stick in the ground in 2012 and say "at this time we don't know how to do such and such. Therefore we will never know how to do it."

It's pretty stupid having an argument about this anyway, we need to do a few other things first like get fusion reactors working. Though I wonder, if you had been around 500 years ago and someone told you we would one day be able to harness that which drives the sun, would you have scoffed and said "impossible, that will never happen".

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Shrike

It's impossible with our current understanding and technology. That doesn't mean it's never going to be possible. Science is a fluid thing, you can't just put a stick in the ground in 2012 and say "at this time we don't know how to do such and such. Therefore we will never know how to do it."

It's pretty stupid having an argument about this anyway, we need to do a few other things first like get fusion reactors working. Though I wonder, if you had been around 500 years ago and someone told you we would one day be able to harness that which drives the sun, would you have scoffed and said "impossible, that will never happen".

FTL travel would necessitate rewriting basically all of physics. There's strong evidence to suggest it's total impossibility, and saying "well maybe science is wrong" just cements what a retard you are.

There's a big difference between "science doesn't know yet" (God) and "everything science knows implies that this defies reality" (FTL).

[Shrike]

It's impossible under General Relativity, that isn't all of physics. Quantum Mechanics and String theory are coming up with some crazy shit. People do have some theories, such as warping spacetime around a ship, or travelling via wormhole, they just aren't workable yet.

[Miley Highrus]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

FTL travel would necessitate rewriting basically all of physics. There's strong evidence to suggest it's total impossibility, and saying "well maybe science is wrong" just cements what a retard you are.

There's a big difference between "science doesn't know yet" (God) and "everything science knows implies that this defies reality" (FTL).

Shut up peasant your ideas are impossible.

[Sir Cornwell]

Everything science knew in 1890 declared that winged flight by man was forever impossible.

Luckily everyone listened or people would still wasting money on it today.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Shrike

It's impossible under General Relativity, that isn't all of physics. Quantum Mechanics and String theory are coming up with some crazy shit. People do have some theories, such as warping spacetime around a ship, or travelling via wormhole, they just aren't workable yet.

Quantum physics works on... the quantum scale.

Warping space-time (aka Alcubierre drives which I mentioned in the Mars thread) are completely infeasible. It's not that they "aren't workable", it's that they can't be workable within the confines of this universe. Wormholes haven't even been shown to exist, assuming they'd be a viable method of matter transit is just as stupid as assuming God exists and that he's going to teleport you through space.

Face it: you are on weaker footing than theists when it comes to FTL. Just because people have been more willing to hypothesize about FTL than God doesn't mean it's any more likely. And like I said, there is actual evidence to suggest it's not possible, which is not the case for God and is not the case for your 500 years ago scenario either.

EDIT: Hahahaha Sir Cornwell that's a retarded example too. We know flight in general is possible because birds exist. There was no evidence to suggest it'd be impossible. We have not observed a single thing that suggest FTL is feasible and have observed things that suggest it is not.

[Shrike]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

We know flight in general is possible because birds exist. There was no evidence to suggest it'd be impossible. We have not observed a single thing that suggest FTL is feasible and have observed things that suggest it is not.

Lol dumbass

But seriously, why do we have to see an example of something before we know it's possible or we need to do it. The other stars are too far away to get to in any reasonable timeframe without the ability to travel at, or faster than the speed of light. Hence if we want to go there, we need to invent that capability. You don't need to see some magic light-speed space whale to imagine that it's possible.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Shrike

Lol dumbass

But seriously, why do we have to see an example of something before we know it's possible or we need to do it. The other stars are too far away to get to in any reasonable timeframe without the ability to travel at, or faster than the speed of light. Hence if we want to go there, we need to invent that capability. You don't need to see some magic light-speed space whale to imagine that it's possible.

You don't need to see God to imagine it's possible. Case in point, FTL is God for atheists.

And you don't have to see something to believe it's possible. You fail at comprehension. Although maybe I fail at being clear. There is a difference between "not being able to do something" and "evidence shows that this is something that can't happen".

For instance in your fusion example there was no observed evidence to suggest fusion would be impossible (mostly because there was no observed evidence to suggest atoms existed, but let's ignore that). If we'd tried we would have failed, but we had absolutely no reason to believe that meant it couldn't happen ever. There was no valid, empirically supported evidence that it was impossible, just that we could not do it.

With FTL the whole of our understanding of physics hinges on the theory that explicitly states that light speed is the universal speed limit. Even if it were possible to warp space time in theory, in practice it's a physical impossibility (ie it requires more energy than you could ever obtain - by some accounts more than exists in the whole of the universe).

[Sir Cornwell]

Once we get a handle on that pesky pygmy mass-inducing Higmy-Boson's mate we'll call checkmate on it and run off to the stars with our inertia-less drives and Bob's yer uncle.

[p6867]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction, but for some reason a lot of atheists seem to think one day we'll achieve faster than light propulsion. These people are retards many order of magnitude more retarded than any theist.

Why? With God there's absolutely no evidence to suggest that one can't exist. With faster than light travel you are going against the very basics of science. There is ample evidence to suggest that this is something that is entirely impossible.

If you believe faster than light capabilities are more feasible than God, you don't deserve to live. Kill yourself.

I don't pretend that I understand all of the scientific advances possible for all the future of mankind and what will and will not be possible in the future.

[Rust]

OP your trolling is getting worse and worse. What "atheists" believe in FTL? What does that have to do with atheism or theism at all, as opposed to just poor science literacy?

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by p6867

I don't pretend that I understand all of the scientific advances possible for all the future of mankind and what will and will not be possible in the future.

Would you say that finding God is likely to happen in the future? If not then you shouldn't say FTL is likely. I've already covered this. Believing we'll make scientific advances that defy the physical laws of the universe (at least on a macro scale) is rooted in delusion and fear.

Originally Posted by Rust

OP your trolling is getting worse and worse. What "atheists" believe in FTL? What does that have to do with atheism or theism at all, as opposed to just poor science literacy?

It has nothing to do with atheism/theism besides the hypocrisy of believing in something completely irrational, supernatural, and unbelievable while refuting the belief in something marginally less so. Also I never mentioned atheists, just that people who believe this is going to happen are stupider/more delusional than theists. Though I suppose atheism was implied.

Neither is likely to happen, but if one of them is more likely it's probably going to be God (he doesn't defy the laws, he sets them - no evidence to support it, but no evidence against it... unlike FTL). With that in mind a theist who believes in FTL is at least not necessarily contradicting themselves - God will make it happen! Although a theist who believes in science overcoming FTL should kill himself and his whole family should be sterilized.

That said... many, many atheists believe in FTL. I'm not saying all of them do or anything, but it's not like being atheist precludes you from being delusional and stupid. Just read some of the posts here. This thread was prompted by a convo I was having with Shrike in GS. I'm just mocking him and others like him for it. Because this is PEOO. People do believe in FTL, and that's a fact of life.

They believe for the same reason theists believe in God too - fear. With theists its fear of life being a meaningless struggle for survival against the natural chaos of the universe that ends in nothingness giving rise to delusions of God. With people/atheists who believe in FTL (I say atheists because I'm loling at their delusions like they do theists') it's fear that we'll never be able to conveniently explore beyond our solar system giving rise to delusions of FTL.

So yeah.

[p6867]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Would you say that finding God is likely to happen in the future? If not then you shouldn't say FTL is likely. I've already covered this. Believing we'll make scientific advances that defy the physical laws of the universe (at least on a macro scale) is rooted in delusion and fear.



It has nothing to do with atheism/theism besides the hypocrisy of believing in something completely irrational, supernatural, and unbelievable while refuting the belief in something marginally less so. Also I never mentioned atheists, just that people who believe this is going to happen are stupider/more delusional than theists.

Neither is likely to happen, but if one of them is more likely it's probably going to be God (he doesn't defy the laws, he sets them - no evidence to support it, but no evidence against it... unlike FTL). With that in mind a theist who believes in FTL is at least not necessarily contradicting themselves - God will make it happen! Although a theist who believes in science overcoming FTL should kill himself and his whole family should be sterilized.

That said... many, many atheists believe in FTL. I'm not saying all of them do or anything, but it's not like being atheist precludes you from being delusional and stupid. This thread was prompted by a convo I was having with Shrike in GS. I'm just mocking him and others like him for it. Because this is PEOO. People do believe in FTL, and that's a fact of life.

They believe for the same reason theists believe in God too - fear. With theists its fear of life being a meaningless struggle for survival against the natural chaos of the universe that ends in nothingness giving rise to delusions of God. With people/atheists who believe in FTL (I say atheists because I'm loling at their delusions like they do theists') it's fear that we'll never be able to conveniently explore beyond our solar system giving rise to delusions of FTL.

So yeah.

PVP, master scientician.

[constantinople]

This thread is terrible.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

It has nothing to do with atheism/theism... Also I never mentioned atheists,

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Case in point, FTL is God for atheists.

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction, but for some reason a lot of atheists seem to think one day we'll achieve faster than light propulsion.

Anyways, to address your point, there is a huge difference between believing it may be possible, and believing it actually true. An atheist may believe in both the possibility of FTL and the possibility of a god. That does not mean he or she believes they are likely let alone that they have been demonstrated or are a reality.

This is in contrast to someone who believes god is a reality (a theist) or believes that FTL is a reality.

Your comparison fails.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

For the record I'd love for FTL to be possible, but I'm not going to let my fear of humanity facing such a massive inconvenience override my rationality and neither should you people.

Originally Posted by Rust

Anyways, to address your point, there is a huge difference between believing it may be possible, and believing it actually true. An atheist may believe in both the possibility of FTL and the possibility of a god. That does not mean he or she believes they are likely let alone that they have been demonstrated or are a reality.

Like I said, this thread was mainly in response to a convo I was having with Shrike in GS. He was adamantly defending the notion of FTL being the end game for human space exploration. He believes it's a genuinely real thing and it's just a matter of time and technological advancement before we have it. A lot of people are like that. He believes in FTL, not just the possibility. Anyone else I piss off is just lulzy collateral damage.

Oh and I meant I didn't mention atheists in my OP, but either way - I edited that post to say it was kind of implied.

EDIT: Although believing in just the possibility of FTL is still stupider than believing in the possibility of God. Like I said, only one has any scientific evidence against it.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Like I said, this thread was mainly in response to a convo I was having with Shrike in GS. He was adamantly defending the notion of FTL being the end game for human space exploration. He believes it's a genuinely real thing and it's just a matter of time and technological advancement before we have it. A lot of people are like that. He believes in FTL, not just the possibility. Anyone else I piss off is just lulzy collateral damage.

If he geniunely believes that FTL is real, and not just open to the possibility for it, then you do have a point. Not that comparing to god as a good comparison. See bottom.

Oh and I meant I didn't mention atheists in my OP, but either way - I edited that post to say it was kind of implied.

Actually one of the quotes came directly from your OP.

Although believing in just the possibility of FTL is still stupider than believing in the possibility of God. Like I said, only one has any scientific evidence against it.

No it's not. Your rationalization for that is absurd. Saying "Oh god doesn't violate the laws of physics, he just creates them" doesn't make it a less extraordinary claim. It makes it an even more extraordinary claim. Throughout history we've seen things that violates our understanding of physics. We haven't seen ANYTHING to suggest something that would "create" them, or "set' them" or anything like that.

[Shrike]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Like I said, this thread was mainly in response to a convo I was having with Shrike in GS. He was adamantly defending the notion of FTL being the end game for human space exploration. He believes it's a genuinely real thing and it's just a matter of time and technological advancement before we have it. A lot of people are like that. He believes in FTL, not just the possibility. Anyone else I piss off is just lulzy collateral damage.

Yeah you're misrepresenting what I said. I believe that FTL may be or will be possible in the future. You think it is impossible and always will be. You have a shitty imagination.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Rust

No it's not. Your rationalization for that is absurd. Saying "Oh god doesn't violate the laws of physics, he just creates them" doesn't make it a less extraordinary claim. It makes it an even more extraordinary claim. Throughout history we've seen things that violates our understanding of physics. We haven't seen ANYTHING to suggest something that would "create" them, or "set' them" or anything like that.

We haven't seen anything that violates this aspect of our understanding of physics and there's a evidence to support the notion that nothing will. Throughout history we didn't even realize light had a speed. Our understanding of physics was not as complex back in the days when things were constantly violating it. The claim for the possibility of God is more extraordinary no doubt, but there's nothing to contradict it either. The claim for FTL is only marginally less extraordinary and has known contradictions.

FTL supporters are more retarded. At best they're equally retarded.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Shrike

Yeah you're misrepresenting what I said. I believe that FTL may be or will be possible in the future. You think it is impossible and always will be. You have a shitty imagination.

No. You said "if you think generation ships are the end game you have no imagination". You were acting like my opinions on Mars were wrong because eventually we'd break the speed limit and we'd be able to easily find and colonize other planets that didn't need terraforming. There wasn't a "we may do this", it was a "this is what will happen and you'd see that if you were more imaginative".

Originally Posted by Shrike

Yeah FTL is a pretty long way off

Real hypothetical bro.

Originally Posted by Shrike

FTL travel has to be the endgame of our society assuming we can expand into and survive in space.

Reeeeal hypothetical. And don't pretend you didn't mean it was definitely going to happen because you said assuming - like I said - generation ships. FTL is not the only way we can expand into and survive in space. It does not have to be our endgame. It cannot be our endgame.

Originally Posted by Rust

Actually one of the quotes came directly from your OP.

So sue me. I'm tired. If I'm ever trolling this hard it's because I'm trying to stay awake.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

We haven't seen anything that violates this aspect of our understanding of physics and there's a evidence to support the notion that nothing will. Throughout history we didn't even realize light had a speed. Our understanding of physics was not as complex back in the days when things were constantly violating it. The claim for the possibility of God is more extraordinary no doubt, but there's nothing to contradict it either. The claim for FTL is only marginally less extraordinary and has known contradictions.

Actually, we knew light has speed and tried to quantify it for centuries.

In any case, your only argument seems to be to say that our understanding of physics is better, and therefore less likely to be violated now than before. Even if true that doesn't refute what I said. We have absolutely no example (not less, not a small amount, not some examples decades ago... NONE) of something "creating the laws of physics" or "setting them". That automatically makes it a more extraordinary claim.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Rust

That automatically makes it a more extraordinary claim.

Which I agreed to, but the fact is FTL is only slightly less extraordinary (if not equally) and violates aspects of physics that we have no reason to believe can be violated. So like I said, they're more retarded or at best they're as retarded.

"We have absolutely no example (not less, not a small amount, not some examples decades ago... NONE) of something being capable of going faster than light."

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Which I agreed to, but the fact is FTL is only slightly less extraordinary (if not equally) and violates aspects of physics that we have no reason to believe can be violated. So like I said, they're more retarded or at best they're as retarded.

"We have absolutely no example (not less, not a small amount, not some examples decades ago... NONE) of something being capable of going faster than light."

No we have every reason to think they can be violated. In fact, it's a necessity of science that they can be. If they can't be violated, it's not science. So no, you can't use that to say that believing in the possibility of FTL is more or equally retarded. In fact you already conceded the opposite:

The claim for FTL is only marginally less extraordinary and has known contradictions.

So you already conceded the fact that it's less extraordinary. You're just adding weasel adjectives like "marginally" to make you feel better.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by Rust

No we have every reason to think they can be violated. In fact, it's a necessity of science that they can be. If they can't be violated, it's not science. So no, you can't use that to say that believing in the possibility of FTL is more or equally retarded. In fact you already conceded the opposite:

The claim for FTL is only marginally less extraordinary and has known contradictions.

So you already conceded the fact that it's less extraordinary. You're just adding weasel adjectives like "marginally" to make you feel better.

No. We have every reason to believe that if something does violate it, we should update our system, but we have no reason to believe that something can or will actually do so until there is evidence to support such a claim. You're misusing falsifiability to imply that because science allows for the possibility of it being violated, we should believe it is an actual possibility that it will be violated. Probably to make yourself feel better.

It's marginally less or equally extraordinary but contradicts an aspect of physics that there is no reason to believe has or will ever be contradicted in reality (even if science in theory requires that nothing is dogma). That contradiction balances out the fact that it's marginally less extraordinary to make it equally retarded or more so.

Marginally less extraordinary because it is only marginally less extraordinary if I'm being nice. In reality I think I'm making a strong case for it being equally extraordinary.

EDIT: Science allows for the possibility of us finding out your DNA is actually made of ice cream. Does that mean it's actually possible? No. Not until someone provides some evidence. What happened to your rationality? Why does it only apply to God?

[SIdt]

While I am quite confident FTL is impossible, there are a few flaws with your argument.

1: The whole of physics would not collapse if c were found to be equal to say, 299792459 m/s. We'd just assume that's the current speed limit, and develop a new theory of why photons only travel at 299792458 m/s instead.
In this case, we are just doing what science always has done, we're building upon older data to create a better approximation of how nature works.
It's quite obvious that physics is far from complete, QFT is just an approximated theory of observed quantum phenomena and doesn't always provide sensible answers. It certainly doesn't explain the gravitational interactions between particles.

2: Nature is god for most atheists. I detest their reverence for it as much as I detest the theistic reverence for god. But FTL is not worshiped. If you tamper with Einstein's field equations, only a few stuffy theorists give a shit - If you genetically engineer a human-octopus hybrid baby that farts CFCs on the other hand...

3: Lack of observation of something does not imply its existence but it doesn't discount it either. You can say with reasonable certainty that FTL is almost impossible, just as you can with the notion of a god, but neither has been conclusively disproved - they are both just conjecture and most likely will be forever, assuming time or whatever lie unification it may emerge from does last forever.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by SIdt

3: Lack of observation of something does not imply its existence but it doesn't discount it either. You can say with reasonable certainty that FTL is almost impossible, just as you can with the notion of a god, but neither has been conclusively disproved - they are both just conjecture and most likely will be forever, assuming time or whatever lie unification it may emerge from does last forever.

Exactly my point, except you're forgetting that FTL is almost impossible because we have reasons to believe such, and a God is both equally possible and impossible. There's no evidence either way in God's case, but damning evidence against FTL. Basically the same thing I've said in literally every post in this thread.

EDIT: As for your first point I never mentioned changing the universal constant, I'm refuting exceeding it. If we know exactly how fast light goes and something goes faster than it (ie what this entire thread is about), light speed remains the same, but the universal constant is no longer a constant. ie the whole thing falls apart. As for your second point I agree fully, atheists worship nature, but FTL suffers from all the same problems as belief in God, so I called it atheist god. It's not that they worship it, it's that it's rooted in similar fears and similarly shitty irrationality.

[SIdt]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

EDIT: Science allows for the possibility of us finding out your DNA is actually made of ice cream.

It doesn't because "DNA" and "ice cream" and their relation to one another is quite clearly defined. DNA is a single molecule predictably composed of amino acids and sugar, whereas ice cream is many different types of molecules.
Not all ice creams are alike, but DNA is always just DNA.

[SIdt]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Exactly my point, except you're forgetting that FTL is almost impossible because we have reasons to believe such, and a God is both equally possible and impossible. There's no evidence either way in God's case, but damning evidence against FTL. Basically the same thing I've said in literally every post in this thread.

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction

The main issue is with your original statement masquerading as certainty.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by SIdt

The main issue is with your original statement masquerading as certainty.

The post you quoted is true. Both are complete works of fiction. If you believe FTL is real and an inevitable end point for human technological development you're stupid. If you believe God is real you're stupid. Because of certainty.

If you believe in the possibility of FTL travel that's a different ballgame. That's where the marginal degrees of retardery come into play. The possibility of FTL has no evidence to support it, and damning evidence against it so you're more retarded than someone who believes in something that has no evidence either way.

I believe FTL is unachievable with reasonable certainty because there's no evidence to suggest I shouldn't believe it's impossible. There's no evidence to suggest FTL is any more likely than you having ice cream for blood, but if someone made that claim you would not defend it as being "almost impossible".

[LSA King]

I agree. People who blindly believe FTL travel is possible are just dreamers who are hoping that it's possible. Is it or will something ever be feasible to traverse the Universe? Dafaq knows. As it stands it don't exist and never will in our foreseeable future.


Personally, I don't believe the universe would exist if there wasn't any reasonable method for traversing them in a time that wouldn't take the length of human civilization.

[SIdt]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

The post you quoted is true. Both are complete works of fiction. If you believe FTL is real and an inevitable end point for human technological development you're stupid. If you believe God is real you're stupid. Because of certainty.

If you believe in the possibility of FTL travel that's a different ballgame. That's where the marginal degrees of retardery come into play. The possibility of FTL has no evidence to support it, and damning evidence against it so you're more retarded than someone who believes in something that has no evidence either way.

I believe FTL is unachievable with reasonable certainty because there's no evidence to suggest I shouldn't believe it's impossible. There's no evidence to suggest FTL is any more likely than you having ice cream for blood, but if someone made that claim you would not defend it as being "almost impossible".

That's true, but you didn't say "Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction as far as the entirety of scientific history suggests", which is what is causing people to get the wrong idea about your post.

"Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction" is a belief whereas "Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction as far as the entirety of scientific history suggests" is a fact.
Calling someone a retard because they don't share your beliefs is completely unscientific. Calling someone a retard because they ignore all scientific observation and all concurrent progress, is completely justified.

[Pee Vee Proots, M.D.]

Originally Posted by SIdt

That's true, but you didn't say "Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction as far as the entirety of scientific history suggests", which is what is causing people to get the wrong idea about your post.

"Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction" is a belief whereas "Both God and FTL travel are complete works of fiction as far as the entirety of scientific history suggests" is a fact.
Calling someone a retard because they don't share your beliefs is completely unscientific. Calling someone a retard because they ignore all scientific observation and all concurrent progress, is completely justified.

It's a pretty pedantic point to make, but I'll let you have it. I could have been more precise, but considering this is PEOO it's probably not a big deal. Especially if it led to more people arguing with me, which is all I ever wanted.

[Unwyred]

Considering the radius of the known universe and the time that has passed since the big bang, in theory, matter has traveled faster than light in order for the universe to be as large as it is observed to be. Will humans ever figure out how to harness this? Probably not. But either way, suck a dick.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Pee Vee Proots, M.D.

No. We have every reason to believe that if something does violate it, we should update our system, but we have no reason to believe that something can or will actually do so until there is evidence to support such a claim. You're misusing falsifiability to imply that because science allows for the possibility of it being violated, we should believe it is an actual possibility that it will be violated.

No, I'm responding to your incorrectly statement claiming that we have no reason to believe they can be violated. We do have reason to believe they can be violated. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of falsifiability if you think that's the case.

It's marginally less or equally extraordinary but contradicts an aspect of physics that there is no reason to believe has or will ever be contradicted in reality (even if science in theory requires that nothing is dogma). That contradiction balances out the fact that it's marginally less extraordinary to make it equally retarded or more so.

Except that we do have reason to believe it can be violated, and worse yet the criticism applies the same way to the theistic god. The theistic god not only creates the laws of physics, but violates them once they have been set as it, by definition, isn't confined to the laws of physics. In fact, the theistic god can violate every single one of them - which is far more than potentially violating something like relativity.