MonDie

Were her directions clear? Did she encourage students to bring in a rough draft first?

Nobody had to look at the magazine AFAIK (although we're forced to look at your avatar), and might these terrorists have killed some people regardless?

Well thanks to these "loony" cartoonists, some terrorists have popped their heads up and are being pursued by the police.

"'I have no kids, no wife, no car, no credit,' he told Le Monde in 2012. 'What I am saying may be a bit pompous, but I prefer to die standing than live on my knees.'" In other words, if Charbonnier was being reckless, it was because he was indifferent toward his life anyway. Now their assassination serves as an example of how loony these terrorists are. I mean, these terrorists put their freedom at stake to assassinate harmless cartoonists!! This was the joke of #1-3 of those cartoons you linked to.

The answer should be to crack down on terrorism, not to hide the cartoonists. edit: Provided that innocent muslims aren't affected, of course. Anyway, they didn't think it was likely they would be assassinated, and rightly perhaps. Unlikely events happen.

We like that our native mammals undergo an agonizingly excruciating birthing process.

Evolution doesn't tend toward some "better" endpoint. Changes in the environment cause changes in the gene pool of a population. This doesn't make the next generation "better", just more adapted to the new environment. If the relevant environmental factors don't change, you can get what's called stabilizing selection. Mutations are harmful far more often than beneficial, but there will always be a minimal level of functionality required for reproduction. Where did you find that? I couldn't find it. There is no piece of DNA that says "I'm a fish". The entire genome works together to make it whatever kind of fish it is. Organisms can be categorized into clades based on how related they are, which is reflected by how similar their genomes are. For organisms that reproduce sexually, members of a species must be similar enough to produce viable offspring, else they're considered separate species. Of course there are missing links. If only every single one of our ancestors were conventiently preserved in a glacier somewhere. I recommend studying a general biology textbook. Campbell Essential Biology will be readable to a 10th grader, and you can always get an older edition on the cheap. You'll see that evolution is an overarching theme built upon many fundamental concepts, and you'll realize how silly this Pro/Anti or True/False dichotomy is. Intelligence could be involved somewhere, but an important part of the scientific method is to make a prediction. Scientists can't test for something unless it has predictable, reproducable effects. This is why intelligent design is a dead end that doesn't allow further investigation. I probably shouldn't waste any more precious time playing teacher, so buh-bye. The key to winning any debate is ensuring that you have the last word.

If I still remembered what FB was like, I would explain why I gave it up. Alas, I have nothing to say except that your sample is biased.

Shipwrecks have been a selective force for ~5,000 years.

"Why do is it that so many Americans believe in these silly things?"

The Savanna-IQ interaction hypothesis posits that IQ actually reflects a unique system for solving evolutionarily novel problems, but I don't know how they distinguish "novel" problems since every problem will be somewhat novel, right...? http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201003/the-hypothesis%26quot;

Perhaps one function is the opportunity to engage a science-oriented audience on religious matters, but in practice the secular atheists seem over-represented since their approach is more dialectical and investigative.

Oh yes, and moontanman's cephalopods also have large brains, and AFAIK their closed circulatory system is unique among mollusks and even lophotrochozoans. That is, like us, they pump pure blood instead of hemolymph (a mixture of blood and lymph). Big neurons too.

"Arachnids build their webs perfectly on the first try, suggesting that it's inherited." - my paraphrasing of Campbell Biology Endotherms (birds and mammals) have the largest brains, and are the best learners. They also have longer rearing periods, something characteristic of intelligent species. The rearing period is a window for learning survival skills.

Hovering the cursor over a front-page thread provides a textbox with the full thread title, except for this thread: Which is the most 'intelligent' animal, in your opinion? shortens to Which is the most http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/21595-which-is-the-most-intelligent-animal-in-your-opinion/page-10

But hiding it from the view of transient visitors, whether as a subforum of General Philosophy, Speculations, or Politics, might stop it from attracting more new religiously-oriented users, which would in turn dampen the religious talk. Personally, I think the phenomenon of religion is interesting, but such discussions could go in Psychology.

What reason have you for believing in free-will? We seem to directly experience intentionality, but the percieved time of intent and time of action are adjusted after the fact in relation to the action's effects. I need to review this stuff.

That religious section looks awfully inviting. Its presence must be responsible for a portion of the religious threads. Maybe tuck it away within the philophy section.

youtu.be/7f-v4f2uuDg?t=4m39s

If this is a population size issue, then the vote's meagerness corresponds to the greater stakes.

Ten Oz was invited, but not I?

I apologize for repping Ophiolite's opening post. The idea was to recuperate their rep loss!

And God isn't guilty because.......

Small quip: Is it that we decide 500ms prior, or that our decision can be predicted 500ms prior?

Replacing "negative rep bombardment" with "automobile" puts things in perspective.