Fortunatley, they don't, and you're still either a liar or a retard. One thing is for sure, you're beneath contempt.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
There are far too many sociopaths in the world, and the Internet seems to be a perfect playground for their misanthropy.
Because climatologists never use field data...
Oh wait, they do, that must me you're either a liar or a retard.
We don't know that the speed of light was always as it is now.
For speed of light to vary, either photons must have mass (so they don't need to move at c anymore), or the constant of nature c would need to vary over spaceitme. Either of these would have massive effects on pretty much everything: photons mediate electromagnetic force, which not only underlays all of chemistry, but combines with strong interaction to define stable elements and how much energy nuclear reactions release, while c defines the very structure of causality itself.
So frankly, in this case "it's an alien movie" is a more likely explanation.
I take it you think your word salad means something.
Wake me up when that happens. For now we have a galaxy that no one thinks is older than the Big Bang which looks like it's further advanced than other galaxies of its age. That's very interesting, but it has nothing to do with your claim.
Latency and bandwidth are distinct measurements.
But they aren't independent. A device that has high bandwidth and high latency must be massively parallel (since for a sequential device bandwidth is simply inverse of latency) and have massive internal buffers to hold all the data being processed. That seems pretty unlikely for implementing such a simple algorithm, unless of course the implementation is purposefully broken.
Your inability to understand what physicists are saying is not the physicists' fault.
Explosions have a center. The Big Bang did not. The Big Bang was not an explosion.
Yes, the method where you come up with models with predictive power and test them against observation, as opposed to bring a pathetic loser who grape onto kookery in the vain hope that somehow it will make your intellectual laziness seem less obvious.
I spent years debating people like you, only to learn your type are too fundamentally pompous and inadequate to actually want to learn anything.
You're ignorance of cosmology is astounding. Almost as astounding as your unearned arrogance.
Read a fucking book by an actual cosmologist and get that idiotic chip off your shoulder. You're not important enough to have one.
Explosion is an awful word because of all the semantic baggage. I prefer expansion, as does the vastr bulk of cosmologists. Inflation was also coupled with a period of supercooling, making it even less like an explosion in any classical sense.
Ignoramuses become less convincing with outrage, not more.
The Big Bang wasn't an explosion; it was a rapid expansion of all space. There is no center.
Uh no, the Big Bang explains the ratios of hydrogen, helium and lithium in the observable universe. All the other elements were created when the first stars went supernova. That is rather the point of the nucleosynthesis line of evidence.