Ringer

I always thought this holiday was in celebration of interspecies erotica. . . What else would cause a bunny to lay eggs?

Why would it not be logical for the group? It punishes someone who has done wrong and shows others that deviance will be punished. So if the punishment of one dissuaded two to not become deviant it is cost effective.

Why would it be restricted to deterioration of animals? Trust shouldn't need to be involved, look at the evidence behind the arguments. All creationist arguments that I have heard are flimsy at best, blatantly false in many instances. I don't think anyone agrees that a house cat descended from a lion. You probably give reasons for your 'beliefs' instead of just stating them. One thing to always remember when trying to think scientifically, your beliefs mean nothing in light of evidence. Of course they are different, they are different concepts. I don't think anyone here has gotten them confused so far as I can see. Do you really think that National Geographic and dailyscience are the original sites from where scientific papers are published? If so maybe you should look into finding some actual scientific journals.

There's a lot of universities that do STEM early undergrad research, you could probably look on your college's website to see if they have any listed to sign up for or just talk to your advisor.

Scientists shouldn't give their opinions in scientific discussion with the belief that opinions have any basis. Scientists engaging in scientific discussion should concern themselves with evidence, facts, and sometimes speculations. None of these has much to do with opinions.

http://www.plosone.org/home.action

That's strange since the current estimate for when the population hits 9 billion is about 2042. Fertility rates haven't been dropping, but birth rates have. In most post-industrial countries the birth rate is less than 2 children per woman, while underdeveloped countries tend to have more. It doesn't mean more people are infertile, just means we know how not to have kids.

So you give a hypothetical to be discussed and then refuse your own premise on the basis that it is not real?

I meant that if any of those things were to occur they would still be subject to natural selection so they are not necessarily different. They are more of a subset of what natural selection act upon. I was just throwing things out that are a part of evolution to help the OP understand the variability of things that can affect natural selection.

You also have horizontal gene transfer, immigration/emigration (can be considered part of natural selection), gene flow, etc. But all of these can be thought of as part of natural selection due to the inheritance of the traits from parent to offspring.

I would say if you just want to make money do an MBA. PhD doesn't tend to pay super well, and you'd probably be in grad school for a while. If you want to do MD then do it because you're passionate about it, not because you want to make money.

First it is not necessarily Satan as the serpent. It is just an assumption made by most people. Old ideologies believed that Adam and Eve could communicate with the animals within the garden. The serpent would them be able to talk to them without intervention of a spiritual body. A side note, the serpent had legs at the time so wouldn't have been a snake in it's purest form. It wasn't until the temptation that it was cursed to 'walk on its belly'. So the serpent species was cursed alongside the humans in it's disobedience towards god. Second any form of an omnipotent/powerful being is going to be filled with contradictions, so asking why is pretty useless. Why would a god make an angel who is bound to rebel. It's just part of the theology.

I would never say such a thing, and no it is not true.

Why don't you just say thief? I don't think pointing to a race has anything to do with your argument, unless you just want to try to get a rise. When did Mark Twain write geography books? So what do we call the country of Niger now? I highly doubt taking out the work nigger, although I do think it's stupid, will change the meaning of a book. In theology it was not that we learned that was evil, it was that we gave into temptation and disobeyed god that was wrong. That is why the banishment from Eden is believed to be our fall, not because we simply knew good from evil. Your analogy is simply wrong. If they had not eaten from the tree they would not have died or known sadness. So it would be a scientists giving someone the secret of immortality and putting vial of something that would allow you to die in a room. They get tricked into drinking the vial and the scientist told them they had their chance and not giving them immortality again. Temptation is a large part of most theologies, just a religion thing.

One reason could be the same as why there were next to none of the current psychiatric diagnoses, their methods were crude and they used umbrella terms to define almost all psychological problems. Also, it could easily be that people died fairly early and easily, people with severe mental problems would probably die fairly early, and those with problems such as schizophrenia, which tends to develop later in life, would, depending on their subset of the disease, probably do some things that could easily end up getting them killed. This could also account for the extremely low levels in hunter/gatherer societies.

Dumb luck, you have probably talked about psychics thousands of times before that, but there was nothing to make you remember it really well. This time you just happen to see an advertisement and remembered it. Same thing with the unlucky day. If something bad happens you are more prone to getting angry over little things that may not bother you if something bad had not happened to you earlier.

Actually I'm pretty sure Indian Giving was a derogatory slam against Native Americans when they started to petition to gain some of their land back and such.

This is an extremely vague question. There are an innumerable potential outcomes, please be more specific. Favorable phenotypes are never necessarily dominant, some just happen to be dominant. Nor are recessive phenotypes necessarily bad. Yes, if a population were to lose it's genetic diversity the population would become stagnant. Think of extreme inbreeding.

As far as I'm aware virtually all men with down syndrome are sterile, I would assume women have the same problem.

I don't really ever remember seeing an actual picture of chromosomes in the process of crossing over. It only happens during metaphase 1 of meiosis if i remember correctly, and since it works on homologous chromosomes it would just look like overlap.

Certain parts of sleep, slow wave sleep I think, cause the body to go limp and unresponsive. It is believed that the areas of the brain responsible for that during that phase are still active while you wake up causing this feeling of paralysis. There are certain forms of insomnia that do pretty much the exact opposite, you are awake and then your body just goes limp for a brief period, because of the same thing.

http://www.wolframalpha.com/bieberbeta.html This was wolfram's

I think it was last year Science said they were merging with Nature. That was a pretty good one. [edit] Just found another one I found funny http://www.jastusa.com/hentai-games-make-their-steam-debut [/edit]

Because nobody expects. . . . The Spanish Inquisition!

a better google one http://www.google.co.uk/intl/en/landing/translateforanimals/ And of course Think Geek has their thing going on a couple are kinda funny. There's one somewhere about a unicorn fossil being found.