Also, the SciAm article decries how liberals don't like Evo. Psych., despite the fact that a lot of bunkum is passed off as Evo. Psych. that utterly fails to deconvolve innate human psychology from socially instilled traits. I'm not saying Evo. Psych. can't produce good work, but the field has earned the majority of…

I'll freely admit my bias makes me skeptical, but I have a hard time swallowing the 48% figure without a clear confidence interval.

Yeah, I agree - hence my mixed feelings.

Were the world defined only by the strongest, rather than the most virtuous, then our only virtue would be strength. It seems obvious to me that more is at play, and there is more to the fundamentals of human nature and what makes human society work.

Why on Earth would feminists laud anti-feminist choices? Of course she's allowed a personal evolution, but feminists are allowed to critique her - be that critique laudatory or condemnatory.

It's pretty firmly in the camp that feminism is about giving women choices, but not all women's choices are feminist.

Might may make it impossible to enforce or achieve right, but it doesn't make right. The past is full of conquerors forgotten by History as well. If it's all about being remembered, men of peace have clearly done as well as men of war. The men of war who have been remember are generally reviled as a lesson to…

Man, I loved that Lucas wanted to do a 1950's red scare movie, but it that's really the only positive thing I can say about Crystal Skull. OK, Karen Allen was pretty good too.

Yeah, it is a thin x-ray beam that scans through your body, but a scan gives you as much radiation dose as 5 minutes at cruising altitude, so that doesn't disturb me nearly as much as the invasion of privacy aspects. Of course I have an MS in nuclear engineering, so it takes a fair amount of radiation to disturb me.

There are, however, counter examples...

But a BB gun center of mass will put your eye out!

I admit, I'm really not clear why Serenity didn't do better at the Box Office. I watched it without ever seeing the show, solely due to the strength of the first five minutes, which was posted on line as a teaser. Those five minutes sold me enough to go see the movie, and I enjoyed the movie enough to buy the series.

Not quite as impressive as James Burke cutting through a pig carcass with a sword - a neebish looking historian cuts a human sized carcass nearly in half with only about 4 hacks.

Art is self-expression. Absent an audience, art is masturbatory. The audience is very important to art, even if the only intended audience is the artist himself or herself.

Do you believe the Church could have been more forthcoming in facing this issue?

See, the first could simply be considered covering their asses by assessing the scope of the problem, the second doesn't appear to be universally true (though perhaps more so recently, I couldn't speak to that), and to the third many would not characterize the Church's response as cooperative. It's got to be pretty…

In your view, how would the Church's response have been different if they were intending to cover it up?

I'm a big fan of the creaminess of butter mints, but I don't think the balance of flavors would allow for curiously strong.

*sniff - sniff*

I watched the hell out of Numb3rs, and that starred physicists and mathematicians (and FBI agents, but the point stands).