Yeah, good luck. There isn't really a whole lot out there. Almost all car companies that aren't German and in the high priced sector seem to have departed the wagon business.

"What kind of world is this where Stuttgart's finest sells milk jugs, but not Mercedes-brand lederhosen?"

Interesting. Though yeah it's at least 10K more than the Subaru was though roughly were I guess the Passat would have been.

Well, let's hope for the best but I won't be holding my breath.

Ah thanks, missed it.

Well yeah, Moffat seems to be unable to find a happy middle ground. I thought some aspects of Davis' Doctor Who telling was a bit heavy handed, but I find myself wishing him back almost.

I always thought that people buying condoms for their iPhones was a good indication of a failed industrial design. I should not need to buy a condom to protect a device when I use it in the way it is intended. But then, there is a huge amount of extra money to be made by companies with very little effort.

You're failing to understand how human psychology works. I had the exact same reaction when I compared the "heft" of my iPhone 4 with a friends Samsung. It's just a human "attitude" towards things that we expect solid things to weight more. Of course that has little to do with the actual strength of a given device…

I should add that I have to wonder actually just how much of this has to do with the BBC getting money, at least in part, now out of the US and indeed seem to have targeted the US market as their next target. Doctor Who WAS great because it was so absolutely British, had stories that really could only work in Britain…

Honestly I am less than enthused about this series. It seems to be more about the Ponds and the Doctor than anything else with a heavy helping of "fan service" in the process.

You know, I hold it with Groucho Marx: "I don't want to be a member of any club that would want me as a member."

Because humans are tribal. We always have organized ourselves around certain "ideas". Our entire concept of civilization is build around this. For the longest time religion was a really good way to "unite" people, the divides we have seen happened as our population expanded and became more mobile and we ran into other…

I think what many people fail to understand is why so many people are drawn to religion. I don't think Atheism CAN give the same sense of "belonging" etc. simply because what unites is the absence of something, not the existence of something. That's why I would argue that taking Atheism beyond a philosophical position…

"I do, in much the same way as I woke up not believing in Santa any more."

If humans are good at something it's tribal thinking. All the ills people ascribe to religion will not just magically disappear when we all suddenly would no longer belief. They exist because the way we organize ourselves, how we form power structures etc.

I would say the proof for that is still outstanding.

Yes, but our form of Government is a pretty new invention, probably dating back to the late 19th century. Before then the idea of Government as a support structure for the individual didn't really exist. Either it was just not able to do so (think US), or it was in the hands of "monarchs" etc. and Government was just…

Very likely yes. That was the point I was trying to make :)

Yes, I actually do see many who flocked to "new Atheism" as "immature" because I do not think that you can get to atheism on the snap of a finger. It is a philosophical position and thus requires investement into it.

What I mean is they were surrounded by (a) religion and tried to get away from it. Atheism was the perfect escape as it seemed to remove the underlying reason for a religion to exist. So they said: "Well, I am not Christian, thus I am atheist" which I think is a logical shortcut that can't hold up the test of time.