I don't understand. Has anyone got a car analogy for me?

The wikipedia entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity/) has details of a couple of different experiments that seem to confirm that the speed of gravity is c, but they're not particularly precise yet.

One of the measurements does indeed use a natural event - a pair of binary pulsars that have decaying orbits due to gravitational damping.

The problem with trying to measure it indirectly is that we're reliant on using theories to calculate the results, so it almost begs the question to use general relativity to calculate a result predicted by general relativity.

I always thought that a comma was kind of like a Baroque period,

Well, it does say about commanding their hosts. Physics has nothing to say about whether or not the universe had their hosts commanded during inflation, so this could be a valuable addition to our knowledge.

I could care less about the inflationary period.

I don't know how you'd measure the speed of gravity, but isn't it generally thought to be the same as the speed of light (and thus the same as other forces)?

Mmmm! Tasty fungus

Yes, and even the Gzilt suspected that their religion might be contrived when they met up with other intergalactic species. Having a holy book that imparts top quality information is a lot more difficult to dismiss than a book filled with vague stories.

I understand you might only have experience of the one gender, but women also suck dicks. TFA mentions Candida and thrush which tends to affect women more than men, so cunnilingus is probably a more common route to getting too much Candida thriving in your mouth.

In summary, you'd have to be some kind of idiot to think this is agenda-driven science.

I think it depends on the nature of the evidence. If the person had significant knowledge imparted to them that would be extremely unlikely for them to know any other way, then that would be far more interesting.

Imagine if a prophet included a page of maths leading up to e=m*c*c or the chemical formula of a cancer cure (although I don't see why a god would invent cancer and then want the cure to be known) or maybe even a work of art that is so inspirational that people are struck with awe? However, if a god wanted to be widely known, it'd be easy to write commandments into the side of a mountain or even create a new bird species whose songs were the different commandments.

The problem with a human testifying about contact with a god is that they should have extraordinary evidence. Third hand reports of turning water into wine or walking on water are too easy to be faked when specific knowledge of the future cannot be faked (unless it's retroactively).

If I ever meet a god, I'm gonna take a bunch of photos, get him to post on my facebook and ask him some specific questions. If he doesn't want to impart knowledge (apart from wishy-washy "be good to others"), then I'm going to suspect that he's a hallucination. There's a lot more evidence throughout history that humans easily hallucinate and make up shit.

Will that work if I change my name to Randall Munroe? Why is his name special?

And people wonder why inbreeding is bad?

Or, the password request can provide 2 options - authorise for the next 30 minutes or authorise just this transaction.

If I'm prompted for a password when I try to buy software, then I'd expect any attempt to buy further software would require the password again.

If I put in a password and it flashed up "Authorised for 30 minutes" and had an easy way to cancel the 30 minutes, then the fault would be clearly with the parent.

It's unreasonable to have a hidden timeout to allow kids to buy games on someone else's account.