Aardvark

That isn't Dawkins idea so there is nothing wrong with it. He makes a good explanation for the evolution of the eye. What he does not do is claim any 'universal' photo sensitivity. That was a misunderstanding on your part. He stated that most species exposed to light would develop some photo sensitivity for obvious reasons of utility and then theorised on how that process could lead on to the devlopment of eyes. No problems there at all.

I never claimed to be able to prove it true. Ecoli made that claim. He also agreed that the theory that the world was created by a giant invisible Aardvard last Thursday at 2.37pm GMT was as equally valid a theory as evolution.

'Independent body'. Those same independent bodies manned by the people who work in management? Those independent bodies which are set up by political appointees and are subject to strong outside pressures to give the 'right' result?

No. No. I suggest you read Darwins 'Origin of the Species'.

Being in the right and showing that you are in the right isn't always enough. The power structures are more interested in preserving their own interests than truth or justice. Management operate to protect their own interests, they control the appeals process.

The giant invisible Aardvark who created the universe last Thursday at 2.37pm GMT.

In order to be a valid explanation there would have to be some evidence. How exactly do i prove my theory of the giant invisible Aardvark true? It would be most helpful in gaining some converts if you let me know. If you believe it can be proved then why don't you want it taught in schools? As a valid explanation surely it should have equal billing with evolution?

The giant invisible Aardvark made your trig notes on Thursday, he also made you with your false memory of studing trig. He also put in a lot of false fossils in the Earth to confuse people.

I think it was always clear that Saddam was irreconciably opposed to the West. Therefore he had to go. Arguments about WMD or terrorism were ephemiral, not the core reasons at all. Maybe he had WMD, maybe not, maybe he would develop them in future. The point was that there was no way he was ever going to be able to normalise relations with the West. He was hostile and that hostility was not going to be dealt with diplomatically. Considering how ready people are to have their opinions pre-made for them, to accept without question whatever the prevaling orthodoxy is i sometimes think humans have a closer link to sheep than chimpanzees.

Being in the right isn't always enough. Sometimes its being in the right which is the problem.

Mental illness is not exclusive to creationists, but they are a major group of sufferers.

Interesting, but learned behaviour does not necessarilly denote consciousness. At the moment is does not appear that anyone is able to give a rigorous definition of consciousness or self awareness.

Whilst i agree that the major corporations are taking advantage of the low wages in these countries it is wrong to state that this is causing more poverty. The poor are not made poorer by the presence of these sweatshops. They get the chance to get these crappy jobs. But, and a big but, these crappy jobs are paying them more than they would otherwise have been getting. The poor are better off for the presence of these sweatshops I agree with your diagnosis. A lot of aid is seriously counterproductive. That is a subject that deserves a lot of attention. I disagree with your prescription. These countries don't need to be given machinery or equipment. That sort of thing noramally results in inappropriate items ending up in the wrong hands and perputrating corruption and market distortion, typically hitting the small guys. Rather, the poor countries need the rich countries to end the huge tariff barriers against them and to stop subsidising indistries on competion with them. The agricultural subsidies in both the EU and USA result in markets being closed and produce being dumped in poor countries. Trade barriers, for example the tarriff on imported prawns from Thailand to Europe costs Thailand hundreds of millions of dollars a year. Why do we need to protect ourselves from Thai prawns? Scrap the unfair subsidies and tarriffs, that would make a real and immediate difference to the poor. But it won't happen. Farmers have a big well funded lobby. Protectionism is always corruption under another name, special favours bought for political contributions.

Lots of species develop characteristics that no other species does. species evolve to fit different niches. It seems you don't understand the principles of evolution?

The fact that we are both mammals is not relevant. We share some features, but not others. There is no reason to assume that consciouness is one of those features. Obviously, we share a deeply rooted instinct to avoid injury, every animal species does. As all animals react to pain the argument that the cats reacting to pain is the result of consciousness is false unless you are prepared to concede that all creatures are conscious. The idea that snails or earthworms are conscious is foolish to me so therefore you argument is foolish. You argue that reacting to avoid pain and injury is dependent on conciousness, using this behaviour as a test of consciousness. As i have clearly demonstrated, your entire argument is false. Perhaps you have another behaviour you could highlight as being the result of consciousness?

A case of wishful thinking on your part?

Did Kevin Conti make a mistake or is creatine both useful for body building and the brain?

I'm aware of that. It is curious that some of the most vocal professional anti Americans are themselves American, which is what provoked me to point out the decadence inherent in these pseudo intellectual progressives. The idea of global control through military force sounds a lot like world domination to me. I'm not sure if we are disagreeing here? Interesting link to Goebebels but what is the direct relevance to this discussion? As to the accusations of Kwiatkowski, i'm afraid that sort of behaviour sounds like everyday spin in politics. Seeing the way Blair can plant a story in the media at arms length and then massage it , the general manipulation of the media and public opinion i'm no longer shocked in the slightest. It's depressing but not news.

Thank you, i was trying to remember that quote. Very pertinent to the discussion.

Looking at the national public radio website it appears that they are not longer making that assertion. It looks like the Kurds were fully able to express their democratic rights.

I saw most of it before giving up out of exasperation. A lot of overblown, lurid speculation, quotes totally out of context and seemingly paranoid opinions from professional Anti Americans. I'm sorry but i simply don't accept Tariq Ali as a realiable source. Yes, it is clear that some in America suffer from hubris, but no, i don't accept the insinuations that the USA is somehow implementing a master plan of world domination. Taken at face value i am not in the slightest bit concerned by the so called Wolfowitz doctrine. It strikes me that only truly decadent, deracinated Westerners could actually be so morally decayed as to be unhappy at the idea of their own country actively promoting its own interests rather than engaging in the orgy of maschocistic self recrimination that the psuedo intellectual progressives deem the only fit behaviour.