That natural selection can produce changes within a type is disputed by no one, not even the staunchest creationist. But that it can transform one species into another — that, in fact, has never been observed.

How do you define God? Like this. A God I could understand, at least potentially, was infinitely more interesting and relevant than one that defied comprehension.

Virtual reality is just air guitar writ large.

No one disputes that seeming order can come out of the application of simple rules. But who wrote the rules?

If theft is advantageous to everyone who succeeds at it, and adultery is a good strategy, at least for males, for increasing presence in the gene pool, why do we feel they are wrong? Shouldn't the only morality that evolution produces be the kind Bill Clinton had - being sorry you got caught?

Naturally, one does not normally discuss plans to commit murder with the intended victim.

The true God is not a form idealized he/she/it is real and therefore, by definition, imperfect only an abstraction can be free of flaws. And since God is imperfect, there will be suffering.... There is no perfect God. And your suffering requires no more explanation than that unavoidable imperfection.

Learning to ignore things is one of the great paths to inner peace.

Secrecy was the problem transparency the obvious cure.