So... I'm right?

Seems to me that that idea is nonsense. Just because it is less nutrient and calorie dense than actual muscle doesn't mean that it isn't still a viable food. Regular flour is less nutrient rich than whole wheat flour, but it is still considered fit for human consumption. Iceberg lettuce doesn't compare favorably with…

I have no idea if you're wrong or right :P

No. Most foods are not nutritionally equivalent to one another. By your logic, all foods that are nutritionally different from animal muscle are less fit for human consumption. This product may not be as efficient a means of consuming nutrients, but that doesn't render it less fit for human consumption.

But what exactly is the nutritional difference?

The chemical treatment aspect of it seems a bit disturbing, but I can't really think of anything inherently wrong with eating this stuff otherwise. Just because it isn't nutritionally equivalent to muscle doesn't make it less fit for human consumption.

Depending on what I'm doing I switch off between a 50mm 1.8, a 50mm macro (kind of redundant, I know, but it was a present), and a 18-200mm 3.5-5.6 (though with that one I've usually got a flash on). I've found that even with the 1.8 the camera sometimes has a lot of trouble focusing.

Hm. I often take photos of moving people, and the (apparently superior) autofocus on even my T1i has trouble much of the time. That being said, I also often take photos of non-moving subjects, which would probably benefit even more from the superior image quality anyway, and I wouldn't exactly have to give up my…

Well like I said, I don't have enough saved up yet to get one. By the time I do, the MkIII may be a bit cheaper. The autofocus wouldn't be a dealbreaker, but since I had heard less than stellar things about it I wanted to know more.

xoD?

Well I currently have a T1i. The autofocus isn't terrible, but it isn't great. You think it'd be about the same?

I've been working on improving my manual focus skills, but I seem to always be off by a bit. Maybe it's my eyes, or maybe it's the small size of the viewfinder, but I generally get better results with the autofocus, and it's still faster than I am.

This is what I'm probably going to do (when I have the cash saved up for it), but I'm a bit concerned about the autofocus on the MkII. Anyone who owns one that can tell me about their experiences?

I guess having a father who had a huge collection of scifi books is both a blessing and a curse ;)

I'm not sure if you're serious, but a virus is comparatively much smaller and it can kill a person...

I understand that the energy generation sites will need new lines running to/from them, but those lines don't need to run through cities any more than the current lines do, no?

What's wrong with the existing power lines?

I guess as a kid I wasn't really capable of appreciating a story that doesn't have much of an overt purpose. Maybe I'll give it another go.

Maybe I didn't like it because I read it when I was pretty young, but I found it to be too confusing once the book seemed to abandon having a plot altogether. The main character didn't seem to be going anywhere or having any purpose. Do I need to re-read it?

It may not be as weird as these, but The Man Who Folded Himself was pretty strange, and not very good.