1001. Beatrix Potter, scientist

Comment #30818 by Logicel on April 10, 2007 at 1:56 am

A fascinating woman: artist, botanist, and enviromentalist.

Though she plodded along by herself fairly well without any official blessing from male scientists, you got to wonder what else she could have achieved if women were allowed to participate as professional and recognized scientists in her time period.

With E.O. Wilson's wonderful presentation still fresh in mind, as it is problematic for the furthering of science and discovery if species are allowed to die out at the astonishing rate they are at present, it is just as problematic that 50% of the human species, that is, females, though they are not threatened with extinction, they are in many countries, a dormant species.

1002. Then Call it God

Comment #30816 by Logicel on April 10, 2007 at 1:33 am

I regard references to Dawkins being a god as being a clever combination of admiration for RD and satire directed towards the theists. Maybe some posters here need to develop a sense of humor.

However, every once in awhile, I do see some apprehensive worship of RD that does put me on my guard. Atheists are humans after all, and have it in their power to idolize anything without thinking including a plain-speaking, down-to-earth guy like RD.

1003. The Coulter Hoax: How Ann Coulter Exposed the Intelligent Design Movement

Comment #30814 by Logicel on April 10, 2007 at 1:10 am

Yup, WilliamP, I would be crushingly disappointed if Coulter failed to take Olofsson satirical review of her book out of context and use it to her financial benefit. My little Annie would be slipping then, and I can't have that.

Coulter gave away her 'power' when she admitted she likes to shock and get a rise out of her audience. So the best response is to be bored by her. And I am.

Above article is both a totally enjoyable satire and a very informative piece at the same time. Very clever.

1004. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30809 by Logicel on April 10, 2007 at 12:50 am

Shrommer, Atheists choose and make their own meaning, and that is why they are committed to promoting a good society. Their lives are full of meaning. And evolution is not chance, that is a common misunderstanding held by religionists towards evolution. Natural selection is not chance, though random mutation is. I find that to be a wonderful combination, and in order for it to result in the complexity we see all around us, billions of years were necessary to accomplish the wonders surrounding us.

And it is tolerance of intolerance that Harris is warning against. Intolerance is part and parcel of each and every dogma, whether it is religion-based or secular like communism, because one must suspend reason to accept the dogma and not to question or challenge it. Having doubts about your religion is not the same as subjecting your religious beliefs to critical thinking. Having doubts about your religion can be encouraged by your religious leaders, because it causes a sense that you are not taking your faith granted. But doubting is not critical thinking, and critical thinking is what all dogma, including religion and communism, fight.

Atheists encourage critical thinking.

1005. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30720 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 2:01 pm

briancoughlanworldcitizen, excellent vid, I commented and rated it, but as usual, there is a lag period before youtube lets them appear. I really enjoyed it. It was very clear and easy to understand.

1006. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30683 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 10:33 am

Well since this study left out The Infidel guy also, then I would say that this study sux.

http://www.infidelguy.com/

1007. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30667 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 9:31 am

Fishpeddler, Cruel? At least Brian and I do not nuke cans of corn in the microwave for the pure pleasure of it!!!!!!!!

1008. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30659 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 8:39 am

Yorker, just in case you were not aware, BrianCoughlandworldcitizen and myself, are also both deeply committed to ending nationalism and patriotism. As we pointed out, just live in a few countries, and you have a greater chance of letting go of this odd emotional attachment to the country in which you were born without your having any say in the matter. It was just a geographical accident that we are born in the countries in which we are born.

Being brought up as a Catholic American, I always was able to reject Catholicism with its inanity, though I had to pretend I was swallowing it hook, line, and sinker until at the age of 18, when I was able to have my own home and no longer had to lie when asked what my religion was.

But with my American identity, it took hold fast with me, and it took several decades for me to let go of it. And it was a wonderful, liberating, and joyous experience. I think my American identity was harder for me to resist because it represented to me the 'real' world. Of course, it is just a tiny bit of the real world. While, with Catholicism, it was always this stupid, dumb, pathetic nonsense that never had any appeal to me whatsoever.

1009. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30657 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 8:16 am

Thanks, poundemonium, for providing the quote for this wonderful description of the Vatican: "...the splendor and majesty of the Western tradition reduced to a geriatric, art-filled echo chamber."

I may have to exchange my own favorite description, a festering pustule which needs to be popped, for it.

1010. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30655 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 8:11 am

Thanks, filthyatheist for your astute picking out such an excellent piece of dross: "...eat and wash,..." Obviously Moore is badly brought up regarding basic table manners--where I come from it is wash and eat!!!!!!!!!! Maybe he is morphing into a cat?

1011. The Selfish Green

Comment #30628 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 4:26 am

celestial_T, Hanks has managed to, despite his bland, good-guy appearance, via significant acting talent and energy to pull off some good roles. My personal favorite is Punchline co-starring with Sally Fields about the aspirations of stand-up comedians. He is noted for his style of understating his acting so much, you take it for granted and think the guy is not acting.

1012. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30611 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 2:59 am

Some of us have discussed on other threads how death is something that we are not allowed to confront with dignity, via psychological, and physical assistance. In part, it is because the religites are clogging up the human energy routes to accomplishing this, with their interference with genetic engineering, dying assistance, and their mumbo jumbo ranting of religious superstitions lacing death rites.

I suspect death in itself would be much less fearful if we were prepared for it properly, talked about it more wisely, and included its reality into our lives in a positive way. We are finite at the moment, and we can deal with it much better than adhering to the joke of what the religious thinks composes comfort giving. I want real comfort, not the mass-controlling crapola which the religites dish out on a sickening and routine basis.

1013. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30610 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 2:52 am

One cannot comment at the original site, and apparently letters to the newspaper deal with only the printed paper's editorials.

1014. Even non-believers must recognise the moral necessity of Christianity

Comment #30609 by Logicel on April 9, 2007 at 2:48 am

Anderson, your wonderful friend, Frank Steel, was wasted on you!

I find Anderson's coy ploy of introducing his terminally ill atheistic friend at the beginning of his article to be demonstrative of this author's incredible manipulative stance. He has known a clear-thinking atheist and all he can extrapolate from that experience is most likely his friend was exceptional, and that special atheistic quality is not commonly found within other atheists?

Again, truth is not important. Belief in belief is. He also assumes that he knows what is best for all of humanity.

The author writes: "As a result, religion is one of the most powerful impulses in the human psyche, and shares a characteristic with two of the others, sex and money."

You mean my generation got it wrong, and it was not "Sex, drugs, and rock and roll" after all?

1015. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30495 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 8:17 am

Fonex_86, If you are serious about requiring help and fearing for your life, don't ask help here in the virtual world. Seek out an atheistic group nearby you and register with them.

1016. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30490 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 7:55 am

Brian, my rating and comment at youtube is not yet showing--there is a lag time before comments show apparently.

Speak slower next time. All in all, fairly decent vid for a first time plunge.

1017. Prophets of the new atheism

Comment #30447 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 4:26 am

There is no way to comment at the original site for this article that I can see. However, the majority of the posts so far on this thread would have been good enough to copy and paste if comments were allowed.

Comments posted here are often written with such clarity fueled by passion and solidarity provided by the knowledge that you are preaching to the choir, that I think that these comments in their original form should be copied and pasted without much editing to provide the pow quality that our atheist stance needs to the original sites of the articles allowing comments.

Such comments should be edited for profanity and name-calling. Just do it. After writing your original comment, check to see if the original source of the article allows comments, and than copy and paste. Make our thoughtful comments work harder, give them more exposure. However, don't waste your time posting to fundy sites, they will just censor your comment. But for mainstream media, I encourage us to develop the habit of double posting.

1018. E.O. Wilson Accepts his 2007 TED Prize

Comment #30443 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 3:57 am

Bravo, E.O. Wilson! A truly superb presentation-- done in an informative, stimulating, and entertaining style graced by his charming, cutie-pie manner.

Highlights that really appealed: the marvelous film demonstrating biodiversity set to a song by the incomparable Billy Holiday, the call to arms via The Encyclopedia of Life web project, the coinage of HIPPO as means to stay aware of the enemies of biodiversity, and last but not least that magnificent salute to the picture of Darwin as Wilson's final gesture in his presentation.

1019. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30431 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 3:17 am

Unfortunately many people do misunderstand what schizophrenia is: the person cannot distinquish reality from non-reality. Thanks, fortytwo for pointing out that often abused and incorrect definition of schizophrenia. You scored one in my book.

1020. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30423 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 3:12 am

fortytwo wrote: "good point about him knowing he would have to do it - maybe hes an optimist and hoped we wouldn't get this bad."
_______

Are you sure you understand your own arguments? Your God knew that it would get that bad.

1021. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30421 by Logicel on April 8, 2007 at 3:08 am

fortytwo, I, like George Carlin, worship Joe Pesci, and he pawns your God with his paltry 3 personalities because Pesci has managed to create 40 different film characters. Wow, a 40 to 1 God. Super, mega cooooooool.

1022. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30273 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 11:24 am

WilliamP wrote, "And why can't he join us atheists? I just don't get it."
______

Since the author did not come out clearly why he can't join the atheists despite his doubts, my interpretation of his implicit meaning is that he needs to believe even with the doubts. His need is strong enough to hold those doubts at bay long enough so he can get some benefit from his religious superstitions.

1023. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30259 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 11:03 am

41. Comment #30255 by fortytwo on April 7, 2007 at 10:50 am
I don't agree with Very Rev Jeffrey John at all, it seems he doesn't have a very good understanding of his own faith! God didn't 'demand' the blood of his own son - the Bible makes it clear that Jesus chose to undergo the crucifixion, and its not as if he was some random guy God chose to suffer instead of us. Jesus was God, they are the same - God suffered as and with Jesus on the cross. It was all Jesus' choice - that's why it was so important!
_________

Why did God/Jesus/Holy Spirit (how odd for a monotheistic religion to manage to have a trinity while still claiming to be monotheistic--if I wanted to go the religion route I would opt for Islam--there is no god but god) give humanity the ability to sin in the first place if the all knowing trinity knew that humanity would sin and that the trinity would have to get involved in its salvation. Oh yes, only god understands his own plan. How convenient when the absolute idiocy of christian beliefs are exposed, christians go that route.

1024. Answers To the Atheists

Comment #30256 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 10:53 am

What a nice Christian. He is embracing Christianity because he is a weak human, and he cannot expect to be able to perceive what is good and bad by his little old self. And he calls that approach challenging? Try depending on yourself to be moral instead of hitching your moral wagon to a figment of your imagination. Now, that would be a challenge. You may find out you don't need to make believe in order to be an excellent and moral human being. A call to rebellion? What against? Your humanity?

1025. Did John Paul II perform a miracle? Am I Mother Teresa?

Comment #30247 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 10:34 am

That guy with spiny cacti stuck in his skin, with chains across his chest, and a black hood over his face needs help. Will he get it, nooooooooooooo, because his nuttiness is not really nuttiness, it is just his religion!!!!!!!!

1026. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30244 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 10:31 am

bouwe wrote: "I think these things go some way to help explain the origins of this bizarre doctrine which is FRONT AND CENTRAL and AT THE HEART of Christianity. I think it is important that if one wishes to give Christianity a fatal blow that one should learn to strike it at it's heart (after all, that's where the blood is, eh?)

After you accept this crazy idea, then you will think it is absolutely "normal" to symbolically drink his blood and eat his flesh in the holy sacrament of communion!"
________


And faith heads feel persecuted when others refuse to respect their appallingly ridiculous beliefs because they happened to be religious ones? Faith heads can believe what they want to, no one can or wants to make them stop if they do not themselves, but no way should they expect respect for the utter bollocks which they cherish.

1027. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30220 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 8:23 am

I guess if Yaweh nailed all his sinful and truly guilty subjects to trees there would be nobody remaining for him with whom to play his games. Clever bastard.

1028. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30206 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 8:11 am

dirtpiggy, your comment #30194 was eminently reasonable. You should have spare some of your 'superior' reasoning for the peasants of the world--apparently reasoning is a limited commodity.

May I suggest that it is fine to warn us of a long post so we may decide postpone reading it at a more convenient time if so needed, but there is no need to apologize for the length of a thoughtful post. The posters that go on and on about nothing never apologize for their written barfing, but I have noted the thoughtful ones do!!!

1029. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30174 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 6:19 am

The problem I see is that your hard work could be deleted by a Fundy control-freak monitor. I have brought this up before, but some of the content at this website is excellent and should somehow be collected into a more navigable vehicle than at present so its nuggets can be posted at other sites more easily--a litany of well honed responses to the typical absurdity presented by supporters of religious superstitions and their apologists. No need to re-invent the literary wheel in combating religion

1030. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30172 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 6:15 am

As much as I enjoy your graphic posts, bouwe I hope you let some of your creative juices flow at Fundy's websites. Some atheists have the gumption and potent creativity to sock it to those fundies. I am not one of them.

1031. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30170 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 6:12 am

bouwe wrote, "(Mel Gibson paints the picture for you in his theological snuff movie)"

________

Damg, that is a great description of that wingnut's glory-in-gore 'masterpiece'.

1032. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30159 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 5:21 am

Oh fonex_86, it must be disgustingly hard for you to endure Easter when you are surrounded by wingnuts. Keep your sense of humor and hold steadfastly to your understanding of the absurdity of their beliefs and realize you are one tough mother to be atheistic in your environment.

1033. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30157 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 5:19 am

If any bit of the Christian tenets can clearly show that religion in general is derived from ancient and pagan beliefs it is the sacrifice made by God of his only son to atone for sins which he himself made possible and then pretends that his subjects have free will to choose to either commit or not commit sins despite the fact that he is all knowing and is very hard to understand.

This jumble of nonsense came into being because ancient men had little understanding of the natural world. However, there is no excuse for this crapola to flourish at present without serious and sustained criticism of its absurd dangers of blindly following outdated and useless information simply because believing in belief in good. Believing in information which is based on evidence is good, not in pure faith-based religious superstitions.

1034. Crucifixion 'makes God into a psychopath'

Comment #30154 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 5:06 am

bouwe wrote: "Being asked to "believe" (whatever that means!) in such things made me an atheist by the time I was 18. I wasn't "influenced" by any one, I just worked it out by ALLOWING myself to ask questions and actually THINK through these absurd propositions to their absurd nonsensical "conclusions".
________

And when an atheist hammers the point of how absurd these basic beliefs underpinning religious superstitions truly are, we are then told, oh, nobody believes in that nonsense, in a white-bearded guy sitting on a cloud in the sky. No, we believe that belief in belief is good. Hence, atheists regard the apologists for religious superstitions to be the real elitists and on one level even more dangerous than the religious wingnuts.

1035. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30149 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 4:41 am

"The Crucifixion and the Resurrection are just as distasteful for Richard Dawkins as for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, because they subvert the idea that man is at his greatest when he is most strong, masterful and clever."
_______

What a bunch of dross--so man is the greatest when he is being tortured and killed to no fault of his own per the story of Jesus? Go suck a bullet.

1036. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30147 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 4:32 am

When being brought up a Catholic, Good Friday/ Easter was my most hated religious holiday. Christmas I could bear, I mean, if God wanted to get away from his crappy heaven and spend some real time down on earth via the form of his son, I would not begrugde him that small delight. But the crucifiction! What blood, gore, and familial betrayal would greet and horrify me during each and every Easter! Since the adults were peddling this immorality, I was terrified of them also.

Not to mention the inconvenience: My mother forbade me to watch a TV program that I was waiting all week to see because it was being aired on Good Friday--this was before video recorders were available. So what can a sensible girl do? I visited a non-catholic friend and watched the program at her home.

As Heatnzl mentioned, I also was inconvenienced during this present Easter, because the American stock market which I trade for a living was closed on Friday because THE IMAGINARY BOY GOD WAS TORTURED AND KILLED THAT DAY.

1037. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30143 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 4:19 am

Thanks, Hip_Priest for that superb selection of JesusandMo. I think Mo should sue Jesus for having first billing at the site. Why not MoandJesus?

1038. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30133 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:55 am

Spermade?

1039. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30132 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:51 am

Veronique, I have been posting on the net for around 8 years under various pseudonyms. This is what I have learned from this experience:

1)The net in general is a great equalizer, unless you identify yourself in part by an avatar or photo (we still do not know if that is you in the photo), people of different races, religion, gender, and economic backgrounds can discuss topics without being tied down by boxing each other in the boxes as we do out in the non-virtual world.

2) My using a pseudonym has never allowed me to say anything in any manner. My pseudonyms are more to described certain features to my personality, but not to obscure and hide myself from myself, acting in an inappropriate way per my guiding principles.

3) My using a pseudonym is like going to a fancy dress ball--very relaxing, focusing and emphasizing certain desires and wishes.

4) My name was given to me at birth like most people--I did not choose it. Perhaps I will change my real name to Logicel!

1040. Jesus and Mo: Dummy

Comment #30127 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:30 am

a good Jesus and Mo cartoon--that is a microphone between the two dudes, right, and not a dildo?

1041. Did John Paul II perform a miracle? Am I Mother Teresa?

Comment #30125 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:27 am

pauliej, great line--faith is sexed-up superstition. And the believers of such faith are often quite coy about sex. If the crucifiction of Jesus is not a version of some serious S&M, then I am an obedient, Jesus-loving Christian. Not.

1042. Did John Paul II perform a miracle? Am I Mother Teresa?

Comment #30123 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:23 am

"You are living, dear reader, at a watershed in human history. This is the century during which, after 2,000 years of what has been a pretty bloody marriage, faith and reason must agree to part, citing irreconcilable differences. So block your ears to the cooing voices on Thought for the Day, and choose your side.

"But how can you be sure?" Oh boy, am I sure. Oh great quivering mountains of pious mumbo-jumbo, am I sure. Oh fathomless oceans of sanctified babble, am I sure. Words cannot express my confidence in the answer to the question whether God cured a nun because she wrote a Pope's name down. He didn't. Mere language does no justice to my certainty about whether God might be waiting for the return to their Biblical lands of the Israelites, before arranging the Second Coming. He isn't.

Shout it from the rooftops. Write it on walls. Carve it into rock. He didn't. He isn't. He won't."
__________

Now, that's righteous, brother. Thank you, Matthew Parris for such an inspirational message during holy week--a celebration of faith pocked with holes so badly, that a better adjective would be 'hot air' week.

1043. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30118 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 2:04 am

Though women can be educated, society is still geared towards recognizing and rewarding the accomplishments of men over the accomplishments of women. Some women greet this inequality with combativeness, others find niches where the combative stress is less, and others just cave in.

Though I am not familiar with psychological/sociological studies supporting my opinion, I would put forth that the reality which I have experienced in part forms a basis of why women are drawn to the comforts of religion despite the paradoxical truth that Yaweh is a male bastard of the highest order. Life on earth can be tough for both sexes, but it is often tougher for women, so it is comforting to focus on a better life after this one.

1044. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30114 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 1:56 am

As RD pointed out so clearly in TGD such an attitude on part of Moore is akin to elitism of the worst sort--the kind that says forget about it, you can never rise above your station in life, whether it is your gender, your skin color, your sexual preference, your economic class, your educational status, etc.

Moore is doing the exact thing he is accusing clever atheists of doing. Having and encouraging others to follow high standards is not elitism, it is elitism when you prevent others to climb out of their various ruts.

Is Moore implying that poor peasants be given only the crumbs that they can now recognize and that they should be encouraged to pretend such crumbs are joyous, fulfilling ones?

1045. Militant atheists: too clever for their own good

Comment #30108 by Logicel on April 7, 2007 at 1:41 am

Veronique, I hope you have enjoyed a nice glass of wine by the time you read this.

The directions needed for doing boldface, underlining, italics, and blockquotes are given if you click on Comment Posting Guidelines at the top of your comment window.

You can also press these two keys on your keyboard simultaneously: Ctrl and u to see the HTML code being used to generate italics, boldface, etc. Select find in this page from your browser's edit menu to find the words which are boldfaced, etc, then copy and paste them into your window including the HTML code preceding and ending the words. Then replace the words with your own.

1046. U.N. Draft Cites Humans in Recent Climate Shifts

Comment #30021 by Logicel on April 6, 2007 at 8:31 am

philos wrote: "What sparked my comments was dismay and concern that this 'clear-thinking oasis' website is cloaked in liberally biased propaganda, as most Professors would see fit (see link below) and not neutral as it should be." (boldface is mine)
________

What an odd coupling: clear-thinking with neutrality? You need not to have an opinion based on evidence in order to be clear-thinking?

DAWKINS DOES NOT RUN THIS SITE. Sorry for the caps, but I am fed up with posters not comprehending this. I remember fondly Dawkins mentioning during some interview (think it was with the deceased Dickins) that this website is doing very well and is becoming a nice community, and he went go to say that he can say that, because he has NOTHING to do with the running of the site.

Dawkins does seem to be liberal based in his thinking which is what I have gleaned from his writings, but not rabidly so. He is more of a libertarian, in the sense that private matters are nobody's business except the people involved (particularly regarding sexual activity between consenting adults).

So philos, by boxing Dawkins as an liberal professor just because Dawkins is a professor, and then implying that Dawkins has some kind of liberal agenda for a website IN WHICH HE IS NOT INVOLVED IN, shows clearly that philos needs to learn how to be both clear thinking and opinionated at the same time.

And Briancoughlandworldcitizen, what happened, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed today? You are close to being gracious in this thread!!!(;-)))

1047. Dawkins vs Haggard: the Python Edition

Comment #30007 by Logicel on April 6, 2007 at 5:48 am

28. Comment #29991 by Vee eL on April 6, 2007 at 2:34 am
I liked the similarity between the two clips:
No information reached Haggerd/petshopman.

_______

great point

1048. The Selfish Green

Comment #30001 by Logicel on April 6, 2007 at 3:40 am

Yup, Veronique, I have been in France for ten years so far.

1049. The Selfish Green

Comment #30000 by Logicel on April 6, 2007 at 3:32 am

Hey Yorker, I don't know if you ever heard of Attenborough, but he is really an admirable chap, you ought to check him out! (;-)))

1050. The Selfish Green

Comment #29998 by Logicel on April 6, 2007 at 3:28 am

Veronique, thanks for your feedback on my odd dislike of the eminently likable Attenborough. Thanks to Yorker, I have now experienced the wished for epiphany. Onto working on my other existing faults.

The content of your comments and the style in which they are written actually reminds me a bit of Jane Goodall's ineffable essence.