How I read it (both here and in individual reviews) is that the film's acting was praised in general and Fassbender's in particular. First place doesn't mean everyone else sucks. However, it honestly doesn't matter that much. The main point I was making (which you agreed upon) has been lost by now, so there's not…

"Later, prominent atheist and pop science author Richard Dawkins wrote a comment in response to Watson's video on evolutionary biologist PZ Myers' blog. Dawkins decided to satirize Watson's stance by pretending he was Watson writing a letter to abused women in the Middle East and Africa."

Really? Because I've seen praise for Fassbender at least in every review I've read, with praise for Elba, Rapace, and Theron usually not far behind.

I can understand the other criticisms even if I disagree with them... but acting? That's one of the most praised elements of the movie. Even people who hate Prometheus generally say the actors brought their all to the film.

I get what you're saying, but $100 really is trivial in terms of development funds. If you can't raise $100 to market a game (which is what Greenlight really is when it comes down to it), chances are you're not going to make one. Even indie developers routinely spend several times that.

That was a great episode, though I do think the way they framed the story (as Sisko reminiscing to himself) was a bit overdramatic. But yeah, that definitely counts in my book.

Technically, Pluto's still a planet. It's just not a "major" planet anymore; it's a "dwarf" planet.

I'm pretty much on the same page as you are (it may not be a great movie, but it's hardly a terrible one) but I wouldn't pus the argument too hard. It has a tendency to devolve pretty quickly in my experience.

"the xenos look pretty light, so they're low on mass full of acid so it's plausible they can get that big without eating anything. "

That wasn't what I was saying. What I was saying is that the sheer number of aliens in the colony is implausible given the small population. Looking at just Alien you'd expect a much higher mortality rate than infestation rate.

Still counts as a technical truth.

"Batman DID kill Harvey Dent. That wasn't the lie. The lie was that Batman killed the people that Harvey actually killed, and that he didn't have completely justified reasons for killing Dent, who was at that point a crazy murderer threatening to kill a child."

"Batman Killed Harvey Dent"

"If there's a etymological problem, it's up to Linnaeans to figure out a berry definition that includes the most commonly-known berries, or if the don't, to come up with a new word entirely."

In fairness, there's not much of an explanation for how the xeno in Alien grew so large so fast either, nor how a colony of 158 became completely overrun with xenomorphs in Aliens. Or how the same is true decades later when Aliens: Colonial Marines takes place... after the colony's been deserted.

Good art, though I was honestly hoping for something like Bulbasaur or Charizard.

We've observed facts (genetic and physiological changes, adaptation, etc.) that indicate evolution to be true. However, evolution (by which I mean natural selection) itself is an explanation and therefore operates most correctly as a theory.

"For someone interested in science fiction you may want to read up on science. Evolution has been cross checked in multiple domains and is on the level of the theory of gravity in terms of reliability."

"Questions about the teaching of evolution, however, do seem to belong squarely in this debate, unless education policy is set exclusively by the states"

Education is a state-level policy, not a federal level. It's de facto irrelevant to the presidency.