There's actually lots of air in space. The ISS is still in the atmosphere technically. It's just less dense by many factors of 10.

I'm no expert on the matter but I would say that people who commit violent crimes after playing video games probably were already going to commit a violent crime regardless. They were already mentally ill and dangerous and video game obsession is just a symptom of much deeper issues.

Having said that, one time on highschool I did a shit ton of acid and stayed up all night playing video games at a friend's house and when I went to drive home the next morning everything looked like Need for Speed 2 lol thankfully I was able to recognize that this was just the lingering effects of the drugs and got home safely.

I mean they've tried and recently, but there are actually a lot of additional problems that kick in as soon as you try it e.g. you can't just use the air for fuel for oxidiser once you are going at the sorts of speeds you need to achieve.

Skylon (spacecraft) - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skylon_(spacecraft)

I forget the guys name,

Werner von Braun. He wasn't a nazi, but he worked for them because execution by firing squad is a sucky way to go.

why not design a space craft, which more resembles the take-off of an airplane?

Scientists and engineers are working on exactly that, but the tech isn't ready yet. There would still need to be a rocket stage, but getting to the top of the atmosphere would be safer.

Okay, but the question I am being asked is what are the most convincing arguments for their being a god?

And my response is, is that science has redone a thing that God was claimed to have done, and it created matter.

If you are not a biblical literalist, if you can accept the idea that the Bible is correct, but not flawless in its data communication, then it has at least the tiniest little spider's web strand of reason that says that the hermit Moses, seven-odd-thousand years ago, received some sort of divine revelation that contained information that was later proven to be scientifically true, which lends at the very least a mote of dust worth of credence to the existence of God.

I think you’re giving Genesis more credit than it deserves. It doesn’t say God used light to create anything. In most translations, it just says God created the Heavens and the Earth without specifying how. It says at first the Earth was dark and formless, until God commanded light to exist, creating day and night and evening and morning.

I’d be much more impressed if Genesis told us that the entire universe was compacted into a hot dense state ~14 billion years ago, and that during its earliest moments it passed through a decoupling of the four fundamental forces, then went through a brief moment of incredibly rapid expansion, etc. etc. … but it doesn’t. Instead it incorrectly states that the Earth predates the stars, that day and night predate the Sun, that life on land predates life in the seas, and more. If a divine entity was capable of relating the origin of the universe and life on Earth to an ancient author, there’s no reason it couldn’t do so in a way that’s unambiguous to modern scientifically-literate readers.

I think it’s far more likely there’s no connection at all, and people only see one there because they specifically went and tried their hardest to find one, no matter how tenuous.

A definitive answer is impossible unless God makes itself known. There is no evidence for god and thus no scientific answer. God is a belief, belief is not scientific.

...what started off as a legitimate question has now become an extremely interesting (and amusing) social experiment. Keep the nonsensical, non-scientific answers coming, folks.

There are zero "gods". Any and all are fantasy created by humans.

Stop trying to figure it out.

It's practically impossible. Theoretically there doesn't seem to be anything stopping one from changing their flow of time. Physics technically allows for time travel. Reality and practical application don't.

Very simple: It would not ease the problem. Rockets explode violently because they have to carry both the fuel and the oxydizer, and this is a dangerous mix. Things will blow up at the smallest error, and errors are made because it is still cutting edge research.

From what (i think) i understand about time is, it is a property of space (which is a energy level) that can be locally warped to go faster or slower, but past and future are purely human mind models.
Meaning: there can be a difference in how fast stuff happens but the comparison points don't interfere (can't be low-energy and high-energy level at the same time) and since nobody creates a "savepoint" of the universe, no past exists.

Edit: right, then there's also quantum time, where it depends.

And you meant dilatation?

Using science to explain God is like using breakdancing to explain engineering.

Well I would think the god that makes the most money off of ignorant sonsabitches and the catholic god certainly wins that shit!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZX_c6zfJ2w

There is one interesting connection that I have found.

In 1999, researchers in New York fired very powerful lasers at each other. When they intersected, they caused an electron and a positron to spring out of the vacuum.

If light can cause the creation of matter, then there's the possibility, however slim, that a hermit sitting on a hill blazed out of his gourd on some divine bush could have been given some sort of insight that perhaps he was linguistically incapable of accurately communicating.

I'm not saying that this definitively proves anything. I just find it interesting that a hermit on a hill 7,000 years ago could have somehow deduced in any way that light was one of the fundamental particles of the universe, or that matter could be made from light.

Since you’re asking science: The scientific method needs to be used to prove, not disprove, the existence of things.

Well, if you assume that going back in time means you also go back along the position of the earth, then sure. But to simply go back in time doesn’t imply that. You’re right in that it’s all fantasy, I’m just saying it’s two different movements, and us understanding one (movement in space, like walking) and not the other (time) tells me they aren’t necessarily connected.

I recommend a web search for the "god of the gaps" fallacy. You have discovered a 300+ year old concept.

what actual real evidence exists for a god?

the bible doesnt count as evidence.

Which one do you mean?

The question doesn't really make sense to me to begin with... Space shuttles aren't rockets. They were very specific types of vehicles that were launched into space using rockets and were designed to come back. They looked like school buses with wings and landed on the ground like airplanes unlike those pods you see from lunar landers and such.

KSP laughs at your underestimation of just how far nerds will push space simulators.