I had an iPhone 4S and I upgraded to iOS7. I noticed the slower animations and choppier UI right away. It was one of the things that made me very happy that I was ready for an upgrade. My new iPhone 5S performs perfectly, with the smooth UI and animations that I have come to expect from Apple. It seems like the older hardware just can't support it.

Welcome to Zombocom! www.zombo.com

Everyone wants to live forever, but death is the natural way of selection within the species. If death was "cured" then the species would stagnate. Leadership would not change. Younger generations would continuously be stuck at the bottom of the heap (or, at least, in their place within the heap). Imagine working at the same job forever, never getting promoted or increased in pay. Now that wouldn't be eternal life. It'd be Hell.

Me too! Every blasted time.

This study laments that conservatives reject liberal culture and turn it into an "us" vs "them" mentality. However, this is exactly what this study is saying on the liberal side, e.g. Those conservatives don't believe in science. This conveniently lumps them all into a science-hating group and furthers the "us" vs "them" rhetoric. The comments so far on this page show a circle-jerk consisting of "Only stupid people don't believe in science!" in which they lap this study up as further proof that all conservatives are religiously extreme and don't believe in science. It's sad that the very article which points out the vitriolic conservative rhetoric against science (a truly lamentable thing) only furthers the rhetoric from the other side.

A quick template for replying to anyone who disagrees with you in a climate change discussion:

Paragraph one, "You are a moron!": Slander the person you are replying to (e.g. "wing-nut", "idiot", "retard", "moron", etc. Get creative!). Then call them a "denier" so that it seems like they're opposing something like evolution and gravity, which conveniently lumps them into the same category as people who question that too.

Paragraph two, "How dare you question climate change???": Call their argument a "straw-man" and proceed to attack their audacity to question "hard scientific facts" (which you personally haven't seen). Feel free to ignore their argument altogether by calling it "half-truths". Make some sort of reference to this person's education level, mainly that they are not a climate scientist (even though you're not one either!) and as such they have no idea what they're talking about - so they should trust the true experts.

Paragraph three, "Skeptics are coming over.": This is the meat of your argument! Although Richard Muller has actually been FOR climate change, this article claims that he was a skeptic but has now seen the light. If this skeptic has examined the evidence and come on over, why can't you? In fact, it's pretty obvious he was the last major credible holdout (even though if he was really a skeptic, we'd have said he was not credible in any way). We need to make it seem like there is a complete and united scientific consensus about climate change.

Paragraph four, "Case closed.": End on a high note! Make sure to say that case is closed, and has been closed for a long time. The debate is over. Everyone but the person you are replying to believes in global warming. This will make them feel like they are just pushing against a closed door.

Congratulations, you have won! If they are stupid enough to come back with real data, repeat this process until they feel so ashamed that they just shut up.

Anyone have the website for this mod developer? I've tried looking, but all the search engines are chocked full of the news stories and none seem to link to his mod development site.

I'll play your game. :) The real world has always existed with religion, whether formal or informal. The oldest piece of human creation that we have is a clay household god. We as humans (or at least as "human society") have never known a world without religion in some fashion. So this hypothetical world would have to have existed without religion from its start. But in a hypothetical world without religion, if you came up to me and told me this apparent nonsense, I would probably like to know more about this "man who lives in the sky", for it would truly be a novel idea, maybe even having some merit to help explain why bad things happen to good people, what happens when you die, and other existential problems that this hypothetical world without religion had so far left unanswered because it can't be empirically tested.

Really? Automated Teller Machine machines?

I was a CS undergraduate major and I also was looking for new areas of research. I recently completed a Masters of Applied Cognition and Neuroscience at the University of Texas at Dallas. I took a mixture of classes in neuroscience, computer science, and AI. The AI classes were focused on approaching the subject from the perspective of the human brain. It was very fascinating and I could have gone on for a PhD (which was my original plan) but then I discovered that I did not like the heavy research end of that subject. However, you might like it. They were doing some very interesting studies in bionics. Hope you find what you're looking for. Cheers.