Please read up on the origin of IQ tests. To the extent they are calibrated to anything apart from other IQ tests, they are calibrated against academic performance. Because they were developed originally by British and French scientists, they are calibrated against specifically European standards of academic performance.
There is no objective, unambiguously defined, quantifiable quality of "intelligence" that IQ tests can be said to measure. It is an entirely subjective test with no real scientific basis. In fact the only thing that IQ tests absolutely and definitely measure is the ability to do IQ tests.
Because IQ tests are calibrated mostly against a cultural artifact (European academic culture) Cultural bias is as likely a reason for variations across different cultures (very closely correlated with different races for obvious reasons) as any other factor.
Until you can rule out cultural bias in any IQ test (and I really don't see how you can) all your theories about genetic differences are meaningless.
For extra bonus points, find me ANY objective, unambiguous and measurable definition of the term, "intelligence."
Someone's job is on the line.
I'm assuming the GP's argument is that the higher than previously expected possibility of life-bearing planets early in the life of the universe increases the possibility of panspermia, all other things being equal.
The probability of panspermia is product of (at least) two other possibilities:
1.) Life exists somewhere
2.) Life is carried though space from one planet to another by some means.
Regardless of the probability of the latter, (which may be infinitesimal in any case) increasing the probability of the former at any point in time increases the overall probability of panspermia.
... So long as there arent thousands of them per day, sure. In millions of vehicles used daily? Preposterous.
Right. Because nobody in their right mind would ride around in vehicles powered by a fuel known to burn violently from the smallest spark or even explode when mixed with air.
The US administration also believes the EIPC suit cannot move forward because it argues the [supreme] court lacks authority under the 2001 Patriot Act to weigh in on the legality of NSA activities.
So how does that work? I thought the Supreme court was the highest authority on the law in the US?
GP's argument:
The last thing we need is awesome tech only spies and generals possess...
Your argument:
No, having the lack of privacy go both ways isn't as good as having privacy.
Which is shooting down a different position to the one the GP took. No one is arguing that privacy for all isn't the best situation. But this technology now exists, so the genie is out of the the bottle and that option is almost certainly off the table.
We now get to choose between the option where a small powerful elite has this technology, and the option where everyone has it.
I, for one, prefer the latter.
The reason why I so strongly dislike Ubuntu can be summed up in one word: sudo
Sudo was written around 1980.
Ubuntu's first release was in 2004.
You can find sudo in every major linux distribution that I'm aware of - and in fact all of the Unices I've used in my 15 years as developer.
The reason why I so strongly dislike the Toyota Corolla can be summed up in three words: reciprocating petrol engine.
Somebody needs to buy it and run it. How much would it cost?
The best way to accelerate a Macintoy is at 9.8 meters per second per second.
