That's a category error. Christians don't assume the existence of an omnipotent "creature." They assume the existence of an omnipotent creator. A "creature" is a created being. The Christian deity is an eternally existent being that relies on nothing other then himself to exist.

Series 5 and 6 of the new Who actually did something that Doctor Who has needed for a long time: it made time travel an important plot point in several of the stories. Time travel has obviously been an important part of Doctor Who, a story about a time traveler, since it began in '63, but usually time travel has been used as a plot device to get the Doctor into a dramatic situation. Steven Moffat has taken time travel and made the paradoxes an important part of the story itself.

Unfortunately, Moffat has failed to resolve any of these dramatic time travel story lines in a way that makes any sense. He uses time travel as a device to get out of a sticky plot complication without worrying about if it makes any logical sense. The finale of Season 5 illustrates this: The future doctor goes back in time and gives Rory the sonic so that Rory can free the Doctor so the Doctor can go forward in time so that he can go back in time to give Rory the sonic... The only way that I can digest that poorly thought out resolution to the problem of getting the Doctor out of "the perfect prison" is to shake my head and let it slide because I like Doctor Who. But seriously... couldn't the writing staff of the series come up with a better resolution than that?

Absolutely. Catherine Tate was brilliant as Donna Noble and really helped to balance Tennant's interpretation of the Doctor.

I'm hoping that a new full-time companion for Matt Smith's Doctor will enable us to see a different side to the Doctor than the current "Mad Man in a Box." It would be nice to see a more serious side to the Doctor a little more often.

One possibility is that global temperatures have been cooler than the norm for the past several thousand years and whatever caused that global cooling trend has now corrected itself and Earth's temperatures are returning to more normalized levels that were experienced around 5-10 thousand years ago.

What we should be debating is not Climate Change but Climate Engineering: engineering Earth's climate to be most beneficial to humanity and other species as we and they exist today. We should focus on maintaining the climate to which we have become accustomed rather than being puppets of either natural or man-made climate variation.

Climate fluctuations over the course of a single decade, or a single person's lifetime does not allow for enough data to seriously consider the question of Global Warming/Global Cooling/Climate Change. We, as a species, have only been accurately recording global temperatures since around 1850. This record itself is not sufficient for providing a true picture of Earth's changing climate. For this we must resort to Paleoclimatology.

Anecdotal evidence in the form of "this winter has been really warm" is totally unhelpful. Where I live this year has been pretty warm... but last year was one of the coldest that I can remember since I've lived here. Both statements are true, but neither of them indicates either a global or regional trend.

Climate change is very real. The Earth's climate has changed dramatically over it's 5.5 billion (6,000?) year history. Change is inevitable whether it is caused by humans or other natural processes. What we as a species must decide is whether or not we want to affect that change in a way that benefits humanity or if we want to allow these processes, whether natural or man-created, to determine the fate of our species. I for one support the global engineering of climate to benefit humanity and preserve as many other species as we can in order to sustain nurture our species to create a better tomorrow.

No pun intended, but this is an apples and oranges comparison. The iPad is not a personal computer, it's a tablet computer and is therefore in a different category than the Commodore 64.

That said, the boast that the Commodore 64 is the "best selling computer model of all time" may not be entirely accurate. It's important to note that the sales figure quoted actually includes a number of different models of the Commodore 64:
the Commodore Max,
Commodore 64
Commodore SX64
C64GS
and the Commodore 64C.

That's actually five different models, not just one.

Perhaps the proper term is "simulated stereo."

Those are the Canadian memory addresses. Just like Canadian Bacon... it's just wrong.

My 1541 was actually more expensive than the actual C64 when I got it back in the day.
Oh... and get your 1581 here: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Commodore-1581-Disk-Drive-tested-and-working-/190608048217?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2c61200059

If you really, really, really need a retro keyboard you would be better off buying a non-functional Commodore 64 from ebay for about $20 or less with $15 shipping then purchasing a Keyrah board from amigakit.com for about $35 and turning the thing into a USB keyboard. Total cost: $70.00. Plug it into an existing machine and load one of the free C64 emulators (Frodo, Vice, etc.) and enjoy.