Yeah, I agree on that point. I didn't mean to insinuate that you objected to the diet, just wanted to emphasise that it's not the diet's fault that it's expensive.

Yeah, I misread it; my bad. After reading your comment, I went back to check the article but read it from the 3rd sentence onwards for some reason.

Saying that being a racist is a stupid thing to be is not the same as saying a racist person is fundamentally stupid, only that they are being stupid in this particular instance. Which they are.

Examination of skeletons from archaeological digs mostly. And comparisons with modern hunter-gatherer societies.

That's not an argument against the diet, that's an argument against the shitty income distribution in our society that requires poor people to eat food we know is unhealthy.

Source or retract.

Hunter gatherers tend to be of an equivalent height to (what we think of as) modern humans. We shrunk about 4 inches because of agriculture. And tooth decay increased. It's only relatively recently that agriculture has actually been able to sustain a (relatively) healthy population.

Because he's still a Republican and marriage-equality isn't the only policy in the world?

Is it not supposed to be mocking people who consider women to be responsible for men's sexual behaviour?

No, I understood it, I just don't see why the claimed that Prometheus was anything BUT an explanation for the xenomorph. To me, it was the only thing of note ever explained in the entire film, but they keep claiming that Prometheus stands up as a film in its own right. I thought the xenomorph was the only…

It was unique but unfortunately the movement is trying its best to spread its poison to other countries. US evangelical missionaries in Africa are notorious for their anti-gay propaganda, as are the ones in Brazil.

Did anyone else find it odd how they claimed they tried not to make it a direct Alien prequel, but then the entire film seems to do nothing but explain the origins of the xenomorph?

*spoilers in the reply*

Oh thank god, I thought I was the only one who hated it (other than the people I saw it with). I cannot fathom the quality of the reviews I'd been seeing; it's like I saw a totally different film. Agreed on all points.

Aha, I totally understand. Roger Ebert is my favourite film critic and I generally trust his reviews more than anyone else's. I couldn't believe it when I came back from the cinema and saw he'd given it 4 out of 4. But see the film and make your own decision.

My comments where I say it doesn't make sense are possibly a little harsh, it's largely that a lot of stuff is unexplained and I don't think that a lot of the plot progresses in a rational manner. There are too many bits where you can say "but why?" and the film can only shrug and say "because".

I recognised the name when I saw who had written it but foolishly did not check it out. I didn't know he'd written Star Trek, but I didn't like the new film either and I think I know why now...

The "pending court case" was about this guy allegedly being involved in an armed robbery in 2007. Clearly a charming fellow. Hopefully his party gets massively punished at the polls in the second election. And an arrest warrant has been issued.

And the leader denies the Holocaust. Pretty typical hallmark of fascism/Nazism.

You don't think that the fact that the vast majority of successful writers are men (certainly of "literary fiction") has any connection to historical sexism?