Phase one of building our own monolith to nurture the growth of intelligent life is complete.

This article had every single logical fallacy in the book.

Tying the genes factors that contribute to a likely-hood of being religious may have have qualities in common with a stable family life... Like, i dunno, "trust". There's basically a lot of assumptions made throughout the entire article. Any of which given a proper error analysis would cause the conclusion to fall apart.

Also, the assumption that future "religious gene" carriers will be in an organized religion. There's a lot of things that people become "religious" towards. Kings, talk show hosts, drugs, sports teams, presidents, pseudoscience, etc. Just look at Obama supporters. It's so obvious that you can parody it without much stretching of the imagination. Example.

... That for every $1 the government raises in increased taxes, they'll spend an additional $1.10.

if it was fireworks, the birds would be dying in other locations around the US and at other times, such as 4th of July.

This incident took place in a one square mile near the city.

In truth, these pants direct the electricity to the wearer's nutsack, slowly sterilizing stupid people that buy these pants.

Exactly, how does more government controls of all industrial companies' software make for a more secure application? If anything, they'll want their own special back-door access which will itself be a security risk.

The reason we live in a Republic is because a true Democracy almost always degrades into mob rule and eventually an Oligarchy. When stepping back and looking at the big picture, it becomes more obvious that's it's happening right now.

Correct, because those have a rule that lets you bypass the filibuster. (3/5 or 60 Senators or the Constitutional Option which it a majority.) I doubt the DDOS attack had a window that asked, "Do you want to be DDOSed? Yes/No".

They do more than just take great pains to never teach those qualities, they go out of their way to punish students that disagree with their views.