Sayonara

What does that mean?

Just a touch, yes.

Logical gap: If someone doesn't understand that sex between a man and a woman can result in pregnancy, there is a very good chance that they aren't going to magically abstain from sex for reasons that they don't know about. There's a difference between reasonable expectations, and ideal scenarios. That is quite clearly a matter of circumstance and opinion.

Why don't you read up a bit further than the post that was directly before mine, and tell me how a discussion of projectile weapon deployments in space is related to shields? (Mind you, I didn't exactly help responding to YT's question on scorpions.)

Since you're an amateur, and the mathematicians are telling you that you are wrong, don't you think "I simply don't understand why they are not contradictions" might be the more likely solution?

There is no "if" since you have no control here. Seeing as this site is not a democracy, it's a pretty poor analogy.

Here's an idea: let's not feed the obvious troll.

Because we've drifted away from potential shield technologies to general space warfare. Speaking of which, I remember seeing a space warfare thread somewhere a while ago that was really good.

You'll need a great deal of experience as well as the right tools. http://www.ehow.com/how_15171_avoid-buying-fake.html http://www.pagewise.com/diamond-real-fake.htm

Google searches rely on context (i.e. the page content) and authority (which is derived from sites that link to us, and sites we link to), not random labels on things. Hence it doesn't matter what category a post appears in - if it's spiderable, it gets indexed. Like I said in the other thread.

This thread is now off-topic.

Ha, pretty good

Added "affect/effect", and I can't believe I left them off to begin with.

Use your site's .htaccess files for stuff like that.

It's not intended to "sell" anything. If you're saying that the advantages of having a highly developed brain do not outweigh the resource costs, then I must ask you to speak for yourself. Quite so. However this doesn't mean that no change is explainable at a high level. No it does not, because the habitats and the biome itself have changed over time, so the niches have been altered. You're also ignoring that changes in one species will effect changes in another (it's a bit of a bland description, but this is sometimes referred to as "the arms race"), and that the niche is not actually the be-all and end-all of determining success. Let's not throw sympatry and mutualisms out of the window just yet. The whole point of evolution is that it describes the means by which species adapt to changes. It's fairly evident that (a) habitats have changed dramatically in the past, and continue to do so, and (b) that this has resulted in a vast number of species being wiped out because their evolutionary mechanisms were outpaced by the changes. This doesn't imply there is something wrong with evolution as a mechanism. Evolution is not a "thing"; it is simply a property of living systems. Earth's climatic history is one of relatively violent upheaval. No offence intended, but it's quite evident that your perception of evolutionary mechanisms is quite wrong. There is no such thing as a perfect state in a biomic community. Even abiotically-necessitated migration alone would see to that. Not being an anthropologist, I'm not really interested in speculating on weird new theories about the origins of man. The post you responded to was simply explaining why non-advantageous features disappear over time; you seem to have interpreted it as being something it is not.

I have just finished working through that page, and the speed difference is remarkable.

It's more likely that failure to use the tail, due to changes in habitat and habits, meant that those with smaller tails were more successful biomass routes (i.e. less resource-intensive), and natural selection did the rest.

Yes, for simple GIFs. For production-level graphics, no.

My grammar nazi thread attests to that Business analysis and change management.

British music rocks because we use lutes, harpsichords and soforth, instead of those new-fangled guitars and pianos.

Replace "loneliness" with "boredom".

You can imagine how slow things must have been at work today to drive me to such lengths. What annoys me (and even the BBC peeps have started doing this) is the use of "is", or its contractions, when talking about something in the plural. Use "are" damn you! And they say the BBC has not been dumbed down.

Seriously. I have the bitmaps to prove it. (Had I been at home at the time, and not at work, it would of course have been photoshopped.)

I'll have you know that layering images in Paint is no simple task.

Actually, the standard of written English among the general population in the UK is quite frightening. Many people try to write in the way that they speak, with horrific results.