silkworm

Perhaps one thing evolving led to another and that's what lead to the human race. For example, you're not going to have increased intellect without free hands, and you're not going to have free hands without a hips structure that will allow you to walk upright.

Speciation does not require the parent species to die out.

What are you basing this end on?

It's a natural progression. Life apparantly started via the processes of mindless chemical machines. That's my take anyway.

While I agree that (and I think) that anthropogenic sources have accelerated global warming that the overall trend would be warming via many other factors. Some of which may not be even considered currently.

Hmmmm. I'm not sure on how safe this is. I can think of a couple of potential issues but I'm not sure how much of a problem they would be. I'd wait for word from the experts. I'd also do it in open air and not be looking in the top of the beaker when you throw the match in, but I could just be paranoid. A fun thing to do with H2SO4 is rip the copper jackets off of pennies.

Oh man. How did I not realize this? I would have thrown a huge party. I still have 06/06/06.

Well I haven't heard this one yet, which is strange. I'm sure I will in the future. Has anyone seen the loaded equation that traces the 6 billion people on this planet back to 2 at about 6000 years ago? It's charming.

Mercury. I've been saying this for years.

-273.15 degress centigrade is absolute 0. Yeah?

Oh. I see what you want. Well, that's very much a work in progress. This fossil surfaced recently. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060406/ap_on_sc/landfish_fossil_7 I'm still wondering where that semi-aquatic mammal fossil from China fits in. I doubt you'll find anything that's any more than pretty speculative at this point, but I wish you luck.

Exactly. Pressurized gas. Leaking tank. Spark. Problem. It's pressurized gas, and to get decent range it either has to be highly pressurized or too large to be practical.

Does converting hydrogen and oxygen to water release more energy than burning fossil fuels? No. Are hydrogen fuel cells more effecient? No, percent usage yes. Bang for volume, no. At our current technology is it feasable to get the sort of range out of a fuel cell than you can out of a gas tank? No. What's so great about hydrogen fuel cells? Their waste product is water, and its emissions will not produce greenhouse gases/pollution. It's actually quite easy to make hydrogen. We don't have to use fossil fuels to do so either. You can do it with water and a solar panel. No big whoop. We won't spend anything (energy wise except for in distribution and manufacturing), just harvesting energy we don't use. A wind farm could also crank out a lot. Probably the biggest obstacle is making a highly pressurized tank full of a volatile material that average guy won't end up getting himself and others killed with by drunk driving. By the way, your butchering of the second law is pretty common, especially among IDers and other proclaimers. No one ever considers the energy released or even really what the hell "disorder" is, and for that matter what system we're talking about. Don't feel bad about it if you're new to the idea.

Abortion is gruesome and I don't like it, but it does society good. Less unwanted children, less problems now and down the road. It's unfortunate for the child, and really we should all be more thoughtful about who we're having sex with. Not for moral reasons, screw that, but simply for health and safety. Two points. 1 - If you're next to a bomb that blows you to pieces you're not going to have time to feel much. 2 - Who cares, I'm in pain everyday. I figured they could feel pain because they have a spinal chord. Isn't that about the only prerequisite? Whether or not something you're destroying feels pain is about as moot as it gets. That's like winning the lottery and getting all the bills but none of the change and raising a big stink about it. I'd rather be tortured every moment of every day for the rest of my life than to die instantly right now. There is no fate worse than death, no matter what the poets tell you.

Oh, you want the evolutionary poster? Do you know what to talk about when you get there? Here's more of what ecoli is talking about and I agree with him. http://images.google.com/images?q=human+evolution+tree&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&start=0&sa=N Good luck.

Yeah AP, wasn't the first a Utah bird they called Archaeopterix? Which is a pretty overused name I know. I'm not into dinosaurs. I only know it because my niece was writing a report on it when she was 6.

Okay, I feel that there is no such thing as deevolution. There's only evolution. Evolution occurs and it's tested. If it's adventagous then those who have evolved thrive and reproduce more. If it is disadventagous then those who have evolved struggle. If it's neutral, it's neutral. This concept of higher evolved and less evolved is generally not qualified, as are most concepts in the public mind about evolution, and are dramatized to something it's not. I mean, we do well because we're so generallized and intelligent. But does that mean we're more evolved than any of the marine animals that fit their environment so well that they have seemed to evolved for a certain "purpose"? We would do as poorly in their environments (without technology and just thrown in there as is) as they do in ours. With that said, I wouldn't mind the upper body strength of any of the great apes.

I've become addicted to science podcasts recently and I was here at my computer minding my own business when this weird little story came up on this podcast for Quirks and Quarks. It has to do with a dog-like animal found in, I think, Vietnam, that excretes calcium carbonate and has a gland that secretes calcium hydroxide. This story is so bizarre I don't know if it's an April Fools joke or what. I'd give you a summary but I don't know if it will ruin it for you or really if it matters because I have no idea whether this is for real or not. Please listen and tell me what you think. Here is the link to the podcast in segmenthttp://www.cbc.ca/quirks/quirks.xml where you find these instructions

Right. Yeah, but what does that even mean?

That depends. By republicans do you mean the people who hold elective office as republicans or the people who vote for them? And is Hell public? I consider it public.

What does it say about me? I was just asking you a question. You're the """expert""" here right? I know and there are plenty of republicans who hate christians. I was just using the generic stereoptype.

Pangloss, is moderate the only other category you have?

Revprez, That's like calling atheism a religion. It's not. It's not required for someone to have a religion. And so not having one is not a religion.