I just want to know is this true.becouse i heard it lots of time......is this scintficaly proved
205185
your dam right it's true they adjust don't like to admit it and act like they have more self control but don't let them fool you they just hide it better than men do.
301230
Kari Byron mentioned they tried the free-energy myth in one show, but i don't remember seeing that one. i need to be on that show when they revisit that myth, it will be great fun for me to confirm it for them!
262391
Yes, Richard Feynman suggested this way back when. \n\nThe original paper is available here: http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PR/v76/i6/p749_1\n\nWithout a subscription you'll only be able to read the abstract.
661090
There are certainly some scientists who believe that, but they are a very small minority. You aren't actually wrong for believing that to be the case, but you should be aware that it is considered unlikely by most scientsists.
89722
Dear sweet one, \n\n  There is no proof.  If there were proof, then the global population would be in perfect agreement.  There is faith, and there are theories.  And nothing more.
639498
I think the author of the article linked to in your referenced web page (it's the link below) explains it well. One of the many  fundamental constants, the Fine Structure Constant, may have changed very slightly -- or it may not have. The data acquired so far is not conclusive, especially as decided by the scientific establishment, which generally demands pretty overwhelming proof of such a radical idea. And as the author says, confirming evidence must be obtained not merely from more iterations of the same experiment, but from totally different kinds of experiment, and he adds that precision in these other experiment types is not yet high enough to be useful as a proof.
212992
A couple of years ago there was a study that said that the speed of light is not a constant. I need to look it up and see if I can find it. Now I'm wondering what the reason was behind that claim.\n\nYep, I found it:\nhttp://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6092
198801
Yes it is true. It proved that light doesn't need any medium to travel and thus no such thing called aether exists.
408943
There is a great deal missing from this article. Whether or not it is life is questionable. That the material is called "cells" indicates that the material is self-reproducing 'autonomously', and I don't know that's been proved yet.\n\nAlso, yet to be proved, is the idea that the material is of extraterrestrial origin. There are many new types of life being found on earth almost daily. True most of these are just variations of species, but we are finding life in places never before thought possible.\n\nWithout DNA, some other sort of self-replication mechanism needs to be present, and the article made no claims to what form this mechanism takes. I would need to see a great deal more to be convinced of any of the claims made in the article.\n\nThat's not to say I couldn't believe, but I just need more information.
303550
While many of the Holy books of many religions confirm the same astronomical facts discovered by science, I think you are going overboard in claiming that the Q'ran proves ALL the scientific facts established by astonomy.\n\nFor example, does the Q'ran confirm that Valles Marineris is the largest canyon in the solar system?  That vacuum fluctuations can cause black holes to evaporate? That there are approximately 10 million stars in the Omega Centauri globular star cluster? Can we go to the Q'ran to confirm if water does in fact exist in the polar craters of Mercury?\n\nI certainly would agree that God or Allah, being all-knowing, knows these facts and many more.  He knows infinitely more about the universe than we could ever hope to know or imagine.  But to claim that one small book proves ALL astronomical facts is going overboard.\n\nI hope my answer has not been disrespectful to your faith.
228411
This is an subject area where vocabulary is vital for clear understanding, to a degree I am not capable of, however the stuff that you ask about are so small that the only way to attempt to prove their existence is through mathematical formulae based on what we suspect to be true. Our lack of understanding on this subject, which is still very voung, means the answers available are sketchy at best compared to our understanding of molecular structure or atomic structure.\nWhat is known so far can be found in places like the noetic sciences knowledge centre, or wikipedia.
598340
go to this site to have all your doubts cleared\n\n\nhttp://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/newtlaws/efar.html
672052
I have studied this topic for nearly 4 years. I believe it is less than 7,000 years. I had trouble with this until I saw how things are dated. Then I knew that there was no "proof" of anything over  about 5500 years old. Every thing over that age, whether 20,000 years or 4.5 billion years is speculation. I have worked in the science industry for about 30 years. I know my way around a lab. I certainly don't know everything, but I know these old dates given to fossils and rocks are speculation. Recent discoveries in DNA and Micro-biology have placed serious doubt in a lot of scientist minds about evolution. I know for a fact that creation is debated by scientists daily. Many can no longer support theories once held by the majority.
505811
Hi Midge, yes I know of these miracles and have visited one in Portugal, the most famous though is the miracle of Lanciano in Italy, you can check this one on the web.\nto the last comment, yes there is the danger that some scientific nut would try to clone these miracles so yes they have to be guarded.
149743
Go here, gives the full story and how it was authenticated.  Sounds like it's real to me.  But no matter how much scientific evidence you toss at they they are just going to go after the science and claim it's a conspiracy.\nhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0406_060406_gospel.html
642587
is this discovery has any proof? if it is having . You have to write a research paper for it. then you can send it to any international journal of repute such as IEEE Journals(http://ieee.org)
386776
I am not sure if it was propoganda or not, but soviet scientists claimed that they could replicate an experiment where a telekinetic could resuscitate a frogs heart from a distance of 300 kilometers from concetrating on it.  I believe that was the only repeatable experiment on record of telekinesis.  Nearly all claims of telekinesis turn out to be fraudulent.  As far as its relationship with physics, I am not sure it has been fully explored.