I see that you are on your "I don't want to be friendly to this person this week" kick. In any case, I'll try not upsetting you during your PMS period because we know where that only goes...
In any case, let's not turn this around. My whole point is that travelling faster than light (c) is a possibility and even the restraints of relativity might not prohibit it in the appropriate circumstances. I gave you a list of possible approaches, and as is your usual style, you simply waive your magic wand of parental dismissal as if we are supposed to act is awe of your powers. This is simply not going to happen, since obviously this is an active issue of debate in science, and no one's fundamentalist reaction (including your's) should dismiss these approaches simply because you are having a bad week.
Come on Harv, at least be humble and admit you didn't know what you were talking about. There are no statements about "FTL travel" in relativity
Special relativity is not some text in some religious scripture. Special relativity is a theory that eludes to faster than light travel and what counts as restrictions against it. For example, wormhole travel is exempt from FTL speed travel, as well as warp speed travel as offered by others, as well as possibly quantum teleportation, etc. Einsteinian causality is another matter, and there are paradoxes that can be caused by FTL speed travel, time machines, etc. This, however, does not necessarily mean that FTL travel is forbidden outright. Hawking has suggested that there are restrictions to time travel (and I'm guessing FTL speed causality violations), but they are not related to special relativity restrictions, they are restrictions based on the fact that time traveller tourists haven't invaded our time period...
and the only reason you didn't know it is because you have never studied the subject in much depth
I've studied enough to know that special relativity theory may not necessarily forbid humans to travelling to other distant stellar systems, and that this issue is an open question. That's far more than you obviously are willing to admit.
As to your list of links, all I can say is that it's embarassing. You ran a search for 'superluminal' and didn't even bother to actually read what the links were about. I don't know if that's dumbness or dishonesty; either way I find it very sad.
What??? I just showed you clearly evidence and hypotheses to show that your argument that we know the future of space travel was far from conclusive, and you come back telling me its embarrassing?? Stop trying to tell the future, you're not very good at it.
Where is the nice guy Aurino that doesn't attack and insult? The old one is back, and I don't find this one very pleasurable.