Silvestru

Oh, I believe that the 2 previous cases are true. I am referring just to the rape accusation in my post. Apologies if I did not clarify.

Would you find the absence of such evidence as pictures etc as condemning? I had a few relationships that lasted months where I have no evidence that I could show you. Also very few people knew about them. Few text messages on phones and phone numbers that I have since changed and changed again. Does he look more guilty if he cant provide such proof?

Just to give an example to what I am trying to say here. I do not mean any disrespect comparing these unfortunate situation to games but just to clarify my point. Recently a game was released and many people started complaining as they were disappointed in the product. They started getting reparation after they complained. Some people were perfectly happy with the product but after visiting forums for this game and other media, they saw they could get some extra stuff so as you would expect, they started complaining, again, just because they knew that they would be treated seriously just because of the sheer number of complaints. Now back to our case. We do not know if this accusation is true or not but IF, IF (not saying this is the case) you wanted to make a false accusation to get fame and some money, this is a good target. (considering the previous 2 misconducts)

A bit of an off-topic but as Beecee mentioned times have changed. I was watching mad men recently and even though it is just a TV show it does kind of reflect behaviour towards women in the 60's. My point is that a lot of the accusers and accusations (very serious ones like drugging and rape aside) relate these stories from 9-10 years ago when these things happened on a wider basis and with less media or any other kind of attention. But now when these victims see the (very welcomed) changes in today's society they feel like their voice will be heard. Related to this case, like swansont mentioned, mr. Tyson more or less admitted to the "less serious" incidents. I am not saying one way or the other but just from the sentence above, he seems like an easy target for a more serious accusation.

Ok lets go step by step. So why is this static field ...well static? The wave is made out of photons yes? (wave-particle duality aside) Photons have to move at c as they have no rest-mass. But lets agree that photons do indeed "move". (propagate) It's the car lights that I flash in your eyes. And the photons we receive form the sun. All these things would not be possible without photons moving.

If the answer is no I propose we make a real life experiment of the second part.

What is the static particle field? Do you see this as the Static field and the flexible field? Where do you get all this "information"? And what are waves in your opinion? Please don't tell me you are greatly confused on what heat wave actually means. I dont know what do you mean by heat migrates but yes. Heat is energy transferred from one system to another.

And what is the wave made out of? If a river flows and the river is made out of water do the water molecules move? What do you mean just the wave? Again you are contradicting yourself.

Doesn't sound like you can explain Pulsars. Actually your silly speculation aside, it sounds like you can't even make a sentence without contradicting yourself. So which one is it? You describe light as a photonic wave after you say that photons do not exist. Surprisingly as I read further, your speculations get even more ridiculous than the one about photons! I would suggest forgetting everything you think you know about physics and starting anew.

Sorry Ten, went overboard a bit, I can't be objective these days as I have many Ukrainian colleagues at work and I hear only their stories and their family struggles. It's getting to me. Please continue keeping us up to date during these hard times.

I didn't pretend I do. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think you can really have this clarity from the POTUS. Aside from being unreliable in his statements he is more connected to Russia than Piroshki and Vodka. I've seen it a lot in movies but the US never fought directly with Russia if you don't count US's involvement in Russia's civil war. I really don't expect that the current US government would vote to intervene if your scenario came true. You guys specialise more in conflicts involving 3'rd world countries.

That's why we should discuss with Ukr. as well before we "man up". The modern citizen cannot afford to be provoked so easily and vote to take action before we investigate what happened. Those times should be behind us.

All things aside. I think Porushenko's actions should have been consulted with NATO beforehand. I am not discussing who has what rights on the Azov sea but just the implications of sending 2 warships in a sea that a country not known for it's rational decisions believes it has total rights on. If I asked this forum last week. "Hey guys what would happen if Ukr sent 2 warships to the Azov sea and not turn back after being warned?" I am sure the majority of us would at least consider an aggressive response from Russia. I mean seriously. What were they hoping for here? To test Rus? Well results are in accordance to our prediction. pavelcherepan raised a similar point but no one addressed it. What was the game plan here?

My point is that we need to think and not act out of anger. Too many people are thinking or Russia as the enemy. This path I feel takes us to armed conflict. I think we should think about strict economical sanctions. I know many countries are importing many goods from Russia like Gas and others but we should try to cut trade as much as possible with Russia. No imports/exports. Also take some defensive measures just in case but we should not provoke from a military point of view. A cornered bear is a dangerous one. It had an effect last time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_financial_crisis_(2014–2017)

I don't think diplomacy failed. I think it was not done correctly by NATO. We should not really "man up", there should be a serious get-together and have negotiation with Russia. Right now it looks like leaders are just threatening or blaming via press conferences. This is not communication.

This is my thought exactly. But (and this might be an unpopular opinion) I think also Poroshenko might be pulling off a Nixon. (extending the Vietnam war to cause Fear, uncertainty and doubt to get re-elected). BTW as a slight off-topic, I have "noticed" many Nixon tricks in this conflict. Remember the checkers speech? And you know, the kids, like all kids, love the dog and I just want to say this right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we're gonna keep it. I saw many similar strawman speeches during the last years in this conflict.

I think it's a bad look for NAT0 seeing that there have been multiple warnings and no action. We have a saying in my country: The dogs bark, the bear keeps walking.

Talk about up to date. You linked this 2 minutes after it was posted on BBC. Thank you Ten. The situation is horrible. I strongly think NATO should get involved and not just "disapprove R's actions".

This is right up there with "Did Adam have a belly button?" this is the problem with made up concepts. You just make it up along the way I guess. I think no one can reliably answer your questions as there is no scientific method to test made up stuff . But if we are talking from a religious perspective I think the "soul" is formed at conception. The last part of your post is pretty inappropriate so I wont address it.

I guess Gravity kind of does too. Photons of light are not technically affected by large gravitational fields; instead space and time itself become distorted around incredibly massive objects and the light simply follows this distorted curvature of space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_lens

As in it takes the same gullible prick who thinks Bigfoot is real to think that there was no collusion? I agree

Cognac, Ambien, Isaac Asimov sci-fi novel and Pink Floyd in the background again?