Time travel??? Mainstream science guys invited:)

[C C]

You do not subscribe to proposition that past, present and future exist simultaneously. Only Now exist. Do I understand you correctly?

No personal endorsement was expressed with regard to any of the four. For example, in the West (or at least the Anglophone world), one person telling another about a tax on chocolate cakes does not mean the former individual approves of or disapproves the tax.
_

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

No personal endorsement was expressed with regard to any of the four.

Duly noted.

Interesting.

 

[ольга]

You do not subscribe to proposition that past, present and future exist simultaneously.

Only Now exist.


Do I understand you correctly?

Будущее, прошлое, и настоящее существует одновременно для того, кто двигается с абсолютной скоростью. Т.е. находится одновременно везде.

 

[Pinball1970]

You are quoting yourself. This makes it difficult tell what you are asking and whom you are asking it of.

Yeah

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

Yeah

It was already explained.

So your "yeah" inappropriate.

It shows that you have conditioned yourself to pointless arguing to the point that it is only thing you are looking for.

First quote is foghorn.

Then I quote myself as I think foghorn have not read it.

Or not carefully enough.

 

[DaveC426913]

A lot of weirdness going on in this thread. Nothing egregious, just a lot of attempted gate-keeping.

"Inviting mainstream people..." (subject)
"I don't like the way you answered me the first time, so I'm going to quote myself and then ask you again." (53)
"I don't want evidence, since that leads to pointless debate. I want opinions, right or wrong." (58)
"I accuse you of being conditioned to pointless arguing - and in the process, show my own conditioned pointless arguing by lashing out with my own prejudices and insults." (65)


That's all fine, since this is in Free Thoughts.

Although, you should know a few things about your "mainstream science guys":
- if you ask for their opinions, you should not be surprised if you get evidence-based responses
- they don't take well to gatekeeping. Generally, accurate science responses require breaking away from the - often confused - preconceptions of the asker, because it's usually necessary to set them straight on a few misconceptions.
- they take a dim view of being told that they are pointlessly arguing - while being pointlessly argued at (post 65 indicates that the tone of this thread is going to be combative).

 

[grzegorzsz830402]

Although, you should know a few things about your "mainstream science guys":

because it's usually necessary to set them straight

I think, I have gathered all information I need.

So, thank you all for participation.

Bye.