Sayonara

I'm sure there must be some aspect of being ignorant of which you are ignorant. Argh my head. Actually, I would dispute your claim. When was the last time you marched around a bunch of stupid people with a placard reading "Say no to Ignorance - it's Just WRONG"?

DAMN YOUR EYES AND YOUR SOCKS!

Meninger, nobody is deliberately attacking you for the hell of it. You have to understand that the majority of people here - especially the regular posters - have been trained to a high level in the sciences. We're bound to be overly critical. It's what we do.

\o/ Huzzah!

If we all get vaporised I'm blaming fafalone.

Shouldn't the magnetic field be affected by now? He did say the incoming field was huge.

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=777

People who describe themselves as being overtly Anti-[insert whatever here] can have a tendency to be ignorant yet self-righteous.

That's very snappy.

"Like Adam" would do it quite nicely.

http://www.mkaku.org/forums/index.php?act=ST&f=44&t=1678&st=15 Makes me wonder about some things, like why Mr Cunningham feels the need to stay here if it's such an inferior board. He'd be better off spending the time thinking of new ways to bastardise quotations for his signature.

And you talk about avoiding civilian casualties. But hey, you're America. If you think it's necessary then it must be the RIGHT thing to do. Weakest and most hypocritical argument I have seen in all of the Iraq discussions here. For Shame. ps - when you quote people, could you leave the byline in please? Your above post is very confusing because you aren't just quoting one person, yet none of the quotes are attributed to their owners.

So am I. I honestly couldn't care less about petty rivalries on a site I've never heard of.

True. Lindows is just a Linux build, you're paying for the box and the tech support. Might as well download the free build of Red Hat and get all the support you need free on the web.

Just don't go deleting posts where people bash my forums for being quiet and lame, because it's true.

Lollorz

Yes.

I don't think anybody thought for a second he was serious, Strife. Well, maybe Gnome did

How does the the hormone therapy required for female > male transgender process work then?

Interesting information Strife. Thanks

Yes he can. He goes and has sex with a woman, and they make babies. Maybe it happened before he realised he was gay. Maybe he was really drunk. Maybe she was a surrogate for his child. Maybe he was a donor for her child, because she wanted a suitable male partner without the relationship. All of these things happen. If - as you seem to be - you are talking about homosexuality as a behaviour in species that do not have self determination, or the ability to artificially assist conception and birth, then it is possible that there is some evidence of homosexuality being selected against as most homosexual behaviour in animals tends to be a component of promiscuous bisexuality.

Well, true. But insofar as humans are evolving at all, if homosexuality is genetic I doubt we will see it being selected against significantly enough to remove the effect from our species.

Homosexuality does not go against Darwinian natural selection at all. Gay men can reproduce. Since many gay men in fact have children, and a disproportionately large part of the homosexual demograph donate sperm, you cannot really claim that homosexuality is an evolutionary disadvantage. It would be interesting to see how the figures for homosexuals and straight males passing on their genetic information compare.

I think having two or more hearts would be distinctly advantageous.

Whenever you would use "I" if the extra people weren't in the sentence. IE - you would not say "on behalf of me" or "on behalf of I", it's "on behalf of myself". Add in extra entities and it stays the same.