Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Science Technology

What Did You Change Your Mind About in 2007? 578

chrisd writes "The Edge 2008 question (with answers) is in. This year, the question is: 'What did you change your mind about and why?'. Answers are featured from scientists as diverse as Richard Dawkins, Simon Baron-Cohen, George Church, David Brin, J. Craig Venter and the Astronomer Royal, Lord Martin Rees, among others. Very interesting to read. For instance, Stewart Brand writes that he now realizes that 'Good old stuff sucks' and Sam Harris has decided that 'Mother Nature is Not Our Friend.' What did Slashdot readers change their minds about in 2007?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Did You Change Your Mind About in 2007?

Comments Filter:
  • by Ranger ( 1783 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @01:58PM (#21875314) Homepage
    I know everyone is complaining that oil and gas is way too expensive. They are wrong. I used to think the same way. I saw a nice chart showing gasoline prices adjusted for inflation over a period of about eighty years [blogspot.com]. You know what? It really hasn't changed that much. It was still higher in 1981 than it is now. What has changed is a decrease in our earning power.

    Proof that gasoline is still too cheap: I still see tons of Hummers, Expeditions, Navigators, Armadas, Sequoias and other mondo SUVs (aka Urban Assault Vehicles) on the road.
  • by Wonko the Sane ( 25252 ) * on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:05PM (#21875358) Journal
    Who said anything about bringing liberty to anyone? The only thing I heard GW talk about was exporting democracy.

    I'd be much happier if the US was really in the business of exporting liberty.
  • by wizardforce ( 1005805 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:24PM (#21875502) Journal

    Who are you blaming after all? What is mother nature? I just can't wrap my head around the entity that is blamed here? Are you blaming earth for being so imperfect with all the volcanoes and earthquakes? Are you blaming yourself for continuously degrading the environment thus making it harder for you to live?

    you... need to go outside more.. mother nature she "loves" you, specifically she loves to attempt to kill you at every chance she gets, that's why we develop technology to enforce the restraining order against her.
  • by HW_Hack ( 1031622 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:25PM (#21875508)
    can effect any type of meaningful change.

    Healthcare reform, acting on global warming, tax reform, ending a meaningless war, supporting the middle class, fighting terrorism at its roots ( in the Madrases ) and local Muslim populations (versus invading random countries like Iraq or Iran), energy independence ........ on and on

    Since a teenager I've been at least tuned into the issues / politics - and would get wrapped up with one candidate or another .... now in my 50's I see that this just a bunch of horse-shit. I'll still vote (as I have since I turned 18) .... but to invest any time, money, or emotion in the political process ----- fuck that shit.
  • by canadian_right ( 410687 ) <alexander.russell@telus.net> on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:28PM (#21875530) Homepage
    "Mother Nature", AKA the natural laws of the universe, doesn't care about us one way or the other. Mother Nature isn't even aware we exists as Mother Nature is NOT aware of anything. Attributing awareness to 'mother nature' is irrational.
  • by sethstorm ( 512897 ) * on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:32PM (#21875556) Homepage

    An additional benefit is that it has a rather sobering effect on local know-it-all's when they see that their work is in fact inferior to what we can get from a third world sourcing partner.
    Exception, not rule. The locals will end up cleaning after the large amounts of mistakes.

    It has a disciplining effect on the entire organization since the punishment for immaturity is harsh and tangible.

    After this sort of ego bruising they are more ready to accept modern and mature practices.
    Play $DEITY somewhere else, not with workers. If one has to add fear (by offshoring) over their heads to drive a point, something is terribly wrong.

    You're part of what makes people hate offshoring, you use it for fear, and not productivity.
  • by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:33PM (#21875558)
    well, not willing to, more like "forced to" accept triple the workload they used to, resulting in fatigue around which an entire industry of pharmaceuticals arose to keep them up with stims rather than labor regulations to keep offshoring down so they can live healthy lives which involve rest and the possibility of actually speaking with and raising their kids.

    and of course they have to accept the erosion of their middle class status to the point they will never ever retire and can't ever afford a house.. "as the rents go up, and job opportunities go down"

    yes i'm sure our descent into third world status will "only" harm the "immature"

    and where do you get off declaring what is and is not mature? did it ever occur to you that you may be the one who isn't mature. Usually the ones who believe themselves far enough above others to pronounce judgment are themselves the fools.

    But yeah, go ahead and support the destruction of the middle class for your twisted sense of self righteousness regarding other people's maturity.
  • by caluml ( 551744 ) <slashdot&spamgoeshere,calum,org> on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:40PM (#21875600) Homepage
    Yeah, cos people work best with the threat of losing their jobs hanging over them.
  • by aichpvee ( 631243 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:50PM (#21875694) Journal
    If we should be in support of exporting anything (except goods MADE IN USA) it should be secularism. Liberty and democracy will follow from that.

    And GP: It's kind of sad that it took a lunatic like Ron Paul to finally see something so blatantly obvious, but congratulations anyway. I sincerely hope you are not supporting him though. The guy is an anarchist, creationist, and at the very least a promoter of racists.
  • by Hercules Peanut ( 540188 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:55PM (#21875734)
    1. O.K. I believe in global warming now. I heard a lot of dissenting evidence but it appears to be tainted.

    2. Video Games do affect behavior in many children. Studies and family members in the field of education with years of observational experience have made me switch my opinion. I'm still not a big fan of government intervention on the subject, though.

    3. Linux is ready for the desktop thanks to the EeePC. In fact, much of open source appears to be ready to eliminate the needs or even desire for a commercial alternative. Linux, OpenOffice, Firefox. I no longer feel like I'm having to settle for second rate in order to save money. I'd actually choose them even if the alternatives were free.

    4. Slashdot is moderated largely by hypocritical children who will mod up popular opinion and mod down unpopular posts regardless of accuracy. I predict the slow demise of Slashdot as the comments area, a once fertile land of discussion and intelligent observation becomes a members only arena linux/mac fanboys and video gamers who can't envision anyone else's opinion being right other than theirs. It will be a place where where speaking ill of religion, republicans or windows will be given an automatic +2 informative while speaking ill social web sites, video games, or modding practices will be an auto -2 troll.

    All four are great discoveries and lifestyle changes for me.

    Happy New Year.
  • by mcpkaaos ( 449561 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:57PM (#21875758)
    Attributing awareness to 'mother nature' is irrational.

    You must be new around here (humanity), because that's just what we do. Almost everything we do not understand is assigned an identity, a personality, and it almost always wants to hurt you (or burn you in hell forever... out of love).

    In any case...

    Mother Nature is NOT aware of anything

    how are you so sure?
  • Re:Republicans (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Oligonicella ( 659917 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @02:58PM (#21875770)
    Same time the Democrats did.
  • by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:01PM (#21875786) Homepage Journal

    I was always sympathetic to the idea of bringing liberty to those overseas
    Which is why that emotionally potent oversimplification was used.
    Not because it applied, but because it would make you agree.

    Why are they killing people? For liberty! We like liberty, so it makes it okay to kill people: it's for something we like!
  • by rthille ( 8526 ) <web-slashdot@@@rangat...org> on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:07PM (#21875850) Homepage Journal

    In early 2007 I thought I might be able to vote for Ron Paul against certain Democrats if it came down to that (unlikely).
    After learning more about Dr. Paul: that he hasn't felt the need to educate himself about the scientific facts about evolution and rejects it, though wasn't willing to raise his hand during the televised debate where the candidates were asked that question; that he calls abortion "Murder"; and, most critically, that he wants to remove the ability of the federal government to intervene in violations of chuch/state separation.
    If the founding fathers got nothing else right with our country, they got the separation of church and state right. Integrating religion and state power is a sure path to tyranny.
  • by moosesocks ( 264553 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:10PM (#21875870) Homepage
    I apologize if this comes across as a troll, but WTF do any of those things have to do with Ron Paul?

    Libertarians have been tossing those ideas around forever. Ron Paul brings absolutely nothing new to the table, apart from a dose of religious insanity, and a rather hypocritical view on states' rights (a Ron Paul administration would almost certainly result in vastly larger and more powerful state governments)

    Although I agree that the US Federal government needs to be cut back, we can't do so by outsourcing governmental functions to private corporations, or allocating powers previously held by the fed to the individual states. Likewise, there are a few limits to how far the cuts need to be made -- healthcare and education in the US are a joke, and there is absolutely no evidence that the private sector is willing to fill that void.
  • by gr8dude ( 832945 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:24PM (#21875978) Homepage
    It happened so that 2007 was a year in which many things went wrong, and I was really upset with my [lack of] performance. However, on December the 31st I concluded that everything can also be interpreted as good news, because after analyzing the failed projects [railean.net], I noticed that the bottleneck was in me, and not in my colleagues, friends, or the environment.

    In other words, things are [relatively] simple now, because I only have to focus on myself (there is no need to "change other people" or "alter my environment", etc). Of course, this may also be nothing but lying to myself and trying to excuse the poor results of 2007 :-) 2008 will tell.
  • by maeka ( 518272 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:26PM (#21875998) Journal

    But yeah, go ahead and support the destruction of the middle class for your twisted sense of self righteousness regarding other people's maturity.

    I would argue it is not destroying the middle class, so much as moving the middle class.
    Welcome to the global economy.
    There is going to be a painful transition period while the former third world achieves what they have not had for so long.
    Blame the old status-quo on imperialism, blame it on racism, blame it on whatever you want. Regardless, the world is becoming an increasingly level playing field - finally.

  • Emotion (Score:5, Insightful)

    by otomo_1001 ( 22925 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:27PM (#21876000)
    This will probably be out of place here amongst the /. crowd. But I met the absolutely most beautiful woman on the planet, inside much more so than outside this year. And the whole experience changed me and my mind on the value of emotion in general. I am still dealing with the fallout from realizing I have been an emotional equivalent to a black hole up until now.

    It used to be hard to say stuff like that, even to myself. But not any more, personal growth is always a good thing to achieve. And no she wasn't a girlfriend or anything like that either before anyone asks.

    Oh and tv. It is now almost entirely out of my life, to be replaced by real life things like skydiving and adrenaline rushes. :)
  • by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:38PM (#21876072)
    I don't call the shipping of jobs to nations with no standards for labor or human rights a "movement" of the middle class.

    It is right to call it the destruction of the middle class.

    They dont gain our standard of living, but we lose our standard of living.

    Painful transition my arse, it's called corporations raping our nation and leaving us for dead while spineless politicians let them.

    It's called the renewal of the gilded age because spineless politicians let them.

    It has nothing to do with labor competition either. Studies show again and again that the education of so called "skilled labor" in other nations is not nearly the quality those in industrialized nations receive. They are not nearly as competent as workers, all they are is cheap labor to be exploited both for their work and to leverage americans into gilded age poverty.
  • by bigstrat2003 ( 1058574 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:50PM (#21876130)
    First point: secularism is no guarantee of liberty. Religion is no guarantee of tyranny... I remind you that this country was first settled by Puritans.

    Second point: Ron Paul being a creationist is completely irrelevant to his ability to be a good president. Religious views have no bearing on one's ability to run the country.

  • by maeka ( 518272 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @03:51PM (#21876136) Journal
    They might not gain "our standard of living" but they (as a whole, I'm not going to argue individual cases) a better standard of living.
    Without an influx of money and the growth of leisure, there never will be political reform, IMHO.
  • by AhtirTano ( 638534 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:01PM (#21876204)
    A couple interesting observations about those charts.
    1. From 1947-1977 (the first half covered) the mean household income (adjusted for inflation) goes from $26,322 to $51,925. That's almost double the household income. From 1978-2005 (the second half), it goes from $54,764 to $73,304. That's a little more than a 1/3 increase. So the rate at which our income is increasing has dropped drastically.
    2. The further back along the time-line you go, the fewer two income households there are. So the doubling of earning power in the first 30 years of the chart was decreasingly accomplished by single individuals making more. The lesser increase in earning power in the second half is increasingly accomplished by pairs.
  • by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:03PM (#21876218)
    I have no compassion for their "growth of leisure" when we have none.

    We are at the point where we have our "leisure" from ages 1-18 and after that we never see any extended periods of "me time" again.

    compare this with 50 years ago when people could come home and kick back, now we are expected to work 18 hour days, 6 of them off the clock thanks to obscene deadlines and quotas.
  • by bigstrat2003 ( 1058574 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:22PM (#21876380)
    No, you have the right idea, but you missed it by a bit. Religious views still have no bearing on one's ability to run the country. What you're talking about is someone letting their religious views dictate how they run the country, which is a very bad quality, but is separate from their religious views.
  • by kestasjk ( 933987 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:29PM (#21876440) Homepage
    I like the quote from Dawkins: (I forget which book, the wording may not be exactly right)

    Nature is neither good nor evil, just completely and utterly indifferent
  • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:41PM (#21876542) Journal
    The Neo-cons have a rather odd view of the world and of the nature of power. They are the political equivalents of the economists of the 1920s; both essentially asserting that the old rules don't apply. In the 1920s everyone assumed that the Capitalist boom-bust cycle was over for good, that it was going to party days forever. The Neo-cons felt the same way about American power after the fall of the USSR, that the US was a hyperpower that could have nearly unlimited global influence. Iraq has demonstrated that the US is no different than Rome was in its day, a mighty military power, but not so mighty that it can't get overextended or get itself into military fiascos that have very direct political consequences.

    The US now faces a 21st century with a rising China (something that clever folks have in fact been predicting for a couple of centuries) and Russia recovering from its wounds and taking back its position as a pre-eminent Old World power. Europe, despite a lot of roadbumps, is making a growing, vibrant political union, and I suspect in the long term it will become a Neo-Rome, controlling the Mediterranean.

    The Neo-cons have weakened the United States at the very moment when it should have been mustering its resources to prepare for the new order. They thought they can short-circuit the historical trends, and by flying the American flag on distant lands and bringing democracy that they would retain uncontested pre-eminence. They seriously misread the reconstruction of Japan and thought that it could be a roadmap for the Middle East, to safeguard oil supplies and put in friendly powers.

    It's time for Americans to start reading their history, to start understanding that the United States is not some blessed land, but is an empire like any, and that it is just as vulnerable as any in history.
  • by Wonko the Sane ( 25252 ) * on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @04:54PM (#21876648) Journal

    Look at Bush. He thinks that he takes orders from an invisible sky wizard.
    Maybe. He might just say that to appease the type of voters who elected him. Either way, the political power of religious fanatics in this country is excessive.
  • by lcoscare ( 1121345 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @05:07PM (#21876764)
    Which part is removed from reality? His talking about free markets? Minimal government? Austrian economics??? He has written a dozen books, many about foreign policy and economic history, and he was good friends with Milton Friedman, so I don't understand how you can call him a historical ignoramus.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @05:14PM (#21876794)
    Someone with nearly 2000 comments on a newer (900,000) era /. account is claiming they don't have any leisure time?
  • by FiloEleven ( 602040 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @05:29PM (#21876894)

    Ron Paul is a dangerous fad. He does not believe in evolution
    So what? His beliefs also prevent him from trying to force others to follow them.

    and he wants to scrap what little healthcare the poor in the US have access to (bear in mind that the US already has lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than European countries that spend less per capita on healthcare)
    Point taken.

    His platform is yanking away what little social protections exist in the US so that the middle classes can pay less tax
    Wrong - his platform is personal liberty, one of the ideals that this country was founded upon. I happen to be a Ron Paul supporter, though I'm not convinced that all of his ideas will work as he thinks they will. Here's the thing though: I would rather have him championing my freedom, scaling back our massive government, and causing some problems with health care than have the same old shit go another round. We're not in great shape as a country, as any liberty-minded person will tell you. If Ron Paul can succeed only in tearing down a lot of what's been built up, leaving the possibly more difficult job of finding a better solution to someone else, I'm satisfied with that because something will finally be getting done.
  • by Lord Ender ( 156273 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @05:56PM (#21877038) Homepage
    No educated person could ever vote for Ron Paul, and his knowledge of biology is an embarrassment to all those who hold the title "Doctor." A medical doctor who doesn't understand the most fundamental principle of biology is a shame on his school.
  • by 75th Trombone ( 581309 ) * on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:25PM (#21877218) Homepage Journal
    What the crap does it matter whether a doctor understands evolution? Doctors deal with the way people's bodies work today, and I couldn't care less what they think about how they worked millennia ago or how they got here.

    Evolution may be the fundamental principle of biological history, but that's only one facet of biology as a whole.
  • by R2.0 ( 532027 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:49PM (#21877390)
    "compare this with 50 years ago when people could come home and kick back, now we are expected to work 18 hour days, 6 of them off the clock thanks to obscene deadlines and quotas."

    No, SOME people could comehome and kick back - the upper-middle and upper class. Lower middle and lower class folks have ALWAYS had to work their asses off, mainly at shit jobs, for long hours and low pay.

    You are pissed because jobs that USED to produce an upper-middle class lifestyle don't do that anymore. Guess what - that kind of stuff happens all the time. Everyone here rails against the **AA's for not recognizing a failing business model, but somehow thinks individuals should be immune from those same rules. Why?

    IT jobs used to be a good path to the upper middle class; now they are not. Same with factory jobs. Welcome to reality.
  • by 75th Trombone ( 581309 ) * on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:50PM (#21877404) Homepage Journal

    he wants to scrap what little healthcare the poor in the US have access to (bear in mind that the US already has lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than European countries that spend less per capita on healthcare)

    So if they spend less on socialized healthcare than we do, yet they're doing better, then obviously the amount we're spending is not the problem, and perhaps if we spent less and changed some things at the same time, maybe our situation would get better.

  • by Jeremi ( 14640 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:52PM (#21877412) Homepage
    Ron Paul being a creationist is completely irrelevant to his ability to be a good president.


    Really? To me it says something very relevant about his ability to reason from facts.


    Religious views have no bearing on one's ability to run the country.


    But creationism isn't just a religious belief, it's also a (fallacious) scientific position. How can a president deal rationally with issues such as biotechnology or global warming when he can't bring himself to accept evolution? It's like hiring an accountant who doesn't believe in negative numbers, and expecting him to do your taxes correctly. Not going to happen.

  • by Seumas ( 6865 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:55PM (#21877430)
    The original parent says that part of the effect of outsourcing is that it sobers employees up so they'll be more malleable and pliable to executive whim instead of demanding unreasonable things like (at least) cost of living increases.

    Coming from a company that has had more layoffs than I can remember since 2000 (each taking about three to ten thousand people with it), I can tell you the changes I have witnessed in the local employees.

    The change is that many are no longer excited, hard-working, enthusiastic, imaginative employees who love their job and their employer and feel pride in supporting their brand (as if it were a sports team, even) and look forward to their daily work and how it progresses them toward their own personal dreams as well as their professional aspirations to climb the ladder internally.

    Instead, I find many who have been around for a very long time and feel demoralized, devalued and are in constant fear that they are going to be axed in the next round. Especially since there has often been little rhyme or reason to the people chosen to be dismissed. Most seem certain that THEY are next. And if not NEXT, then not soon after. And if it is inevitable, then why bother putting 110% of your energy and effort into it? I've seen formerly enthusiastic, extremely hard working, very intelligent, creative, productive, fantastic people become shells of themselves that mirror what I see when I'm standing in line at Carl's Junior and peeking into the back with the defeated fry-cook who feels he's just an automated process passing the minutes until he can clock out and go home.

    If that's the sort of sobering result you want, may the fates have mercy on whatever company *you* (the original poster) run.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @06:58PM (#21877448)
    I too am disappointed with Ron Paul's opinions on evolution. The body of evidence (from biology, genetics, mathematics, etc.) supporting evolution is truly staggering, and for a doctor like Ron Paul to discount it it's disheartening. Nevertheless, what attracted me originally to him as a presidential candidate was his positions regarding government's role in our lives. Positions which I agree with, and which have been more-or-less consistent throughout his political career (which too me prove him genuine).

    I would not vote Ron Paul for "Biology Leader", but, in the arena of government, he matches best the direction I would like to see the U.S. head towards.

  • Re:Republicans (Score:2, Insightful)

    by chis101 ( 754167 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @07:01PM (#21877474)
    I'm still confused as to why him being a Muslim would be such a bad thing if it were true?...
  • Re:religion (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GWBasic ( 900357 ) <{moc.uaednorwerdna} {ta} {todhsals}> on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @07:11PM (#21877538) Homepage

    I changed my mind about religion, ironically it was because I started going back to church that I realized I didn't believe any of it.

    I realized that a large group of people like getting up on Sunday mornings to sing songs and look at each other's fancy clothes. I realized that religion is more of a social thing then a belief.

    I realized that people fear things like the earth being round, or the earth orbiting the sun, or evolution, because they're afraid that such knowledge will destroy their ability to get up on Sunday mornings and sing songs.

    I realized that far too many people let emotion get in the way of logic.

  • by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @07:23PM (#21877624)

    Everyone here rails against the **AA's for not recognizing a failing business model, but somehow thinks individuals should be immune from those same rules. Why?


    There is a key difference in your fallacious comparison.

    The **AA is a failing business model, not a way of life.
    This implies another business model can take the place of the **AA

    This is not the case with offshoring.

    The middle class is not a business model pal, it is the american dream.

    IT jobs used to be a good path to the upper middle class; now they are not. Same with factory jobs. Welcome to reality.


    This is different from normal "structural unemployment" usually seen with advances in technology disrupting the normal order and giving rise to a new one.
    In such a case people can retrain and reasonably expect to regain their investment in that training.
    Offshoring doesn't work that way. They take one sector, people retrain for another, and then that one is pulled from under them before they can recoup the training costs, and the cycle goes on and on until people say #$@ it.

    So..
    years of college education no longer get you into the middle class
    factory jobs no longer get you into the middle class
    and.. theyre even offshoring Ph.D. level R&D to places like china

    so.. if no education, considerable education, and extremely high education all get you nowhere, exactly where is anyone's motivation to do anything?
    Exactly how is the american dream to survive without government officials putting their foot down?
    This isn't about simply being selfish either. Without a middle class consumption goes down, company sales drop, the US gdp drops. Maybe some other nation picks up the slack, but not before massive depression which impacts all other nations tied heavily to our economy. And of course, it all ends with the US as a third world nation.
  • by Fael ( 939668 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @07:50PM (#21877818)
    Funny... I imagine that's what your cells are telling each other about you right now.

    (Of course, cell language is pretty limited - that's probably the only words they know.)
  • by GoofyBoy ( 44399 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @08:47PM (#21878152) Journal
    Thats what I imagine what Mother Nature is saying about us.

    "THAT'S what you consider as an example of intelligence?!?!?"
  • Re:religion (Score:3, Insightful)

    by InvisblePinkUnicorn ( 1126837 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @09:23PM (#21878354)
    "I realized that far too many people let emotion get in the way of logic."

    Your emotional urge to follow logic no matter where it goes is something you should examine more closely.

    -- A fellow atheist.
  • Re:Republicans (Score:2, Insightful)

    by blackpaw ( 240313 ) on Tuesday January 01, 2008 @11:10PM (#21878926)
    Barack's a Muslim

    Um - no he's not. But even if he was - so what?

  • by phantomcircuit ( 938963 ) on Wednesday January 02, 2008 @02:25AM (#21879876) Homepage
    The real problem is that there isn't a real middle class; there are the rich, the poor, and the well off poor. To say that the well off poor are the "middle" class is grossly overstating the amount of money they have.
  • Richard Dawkins (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sherriw ( 794536 ) on Wednesday January 02, 2008 @09:49AM (#21881576)
    I love Dawkins' point about the difference in how we view politicians vs scientists who change their minds. I never did understand why some people criticize politicians for changing direction- that should be a virtue.

"The one charm of marriage is that it makes a life of deception a neccessity." - Oscar Wilde

Working...