Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Amazing (Score -1, Funny) 147

"I really can not believe that the rovers are still running at all." Thats because you're an idiot. ~ Central Park Zoo's gay penguins ignite debate Dinitia Smith, New York Times Saturday, February 7, 2004 New York -- Roy and Silo, two chinstrap penguins at the Central Park Zoo in Manhattan, are completely devoted to each other. For nearly six years now, they have been inseparable. They exhibit what in penguin parlance is called "ecstatic behavior": That is, they entwine their necks, they vocalize to each other, they have sex. Silo and Roy are, to anthropomorphize a bit, gay penguins. When offered female companionship, they have adamantly refused it. And the females aren't interested in them, either. At one time, the two seemed so desperate to incubate an egg together that they put a rock in their nest and sat on it, keeping it warm in the folds of their abdomens, said their chief keeper, Rob Gramzay. Finally, he gave them a fertile egg that needed care to hatch. Things went perfectly, and a chick, Tango, was born. For the next 2 1/2 months they raised Tango, keeping her warm and feeding her food from their beaks until she could go out into the world on her own. Gramzay is full of praise. "They did a great job," he said. Roy and Silo are hardly unusual. Indeed, scientists have found homosexual behavior throughout the animal world. This growing body of science has been increasingly drawn into charged debates about homosexuality in American society, on subjects from gay marriage to sodomy laws, despite reluctance from experts in the field to extrapolate from animals to humans. Gay groups argue that if homosexual behavior occurs in animals, it is natural, and therefore the rights of homosexuals should be protected. On the other hand, some conservative religious groups have condemned the same practices in the past, calling them "animalistic." But if homosexuality occurs among animals, does that necessarily mean it is natural for humans? And that raises a familiar question: If homosexuality is not a choice, but a result of natural forces that cannot be controlled, can it be immoral? The open discussion of homosexual behavior in animals is relatively new. "There has been a certain cultural shyness about admitting it," said Frans de Waal, whose 1997 book, "Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape" (University of California Press), unleashed a torrent of discussion about animal sexuality. Bonobos, apes closely related to humans, are wildly energetic sexually. Studies show that whether observed in the wild or in captivity, nearly all are bisexual and nearly half their sexual interactions are with the same sex. Females have been observed to engage in homosexual activity almost hourly. Before his own book, "American scientists who investigated bonobos never discussed sex at all," said de Waal, director of the Living Links Center of the Yerkes Primate Center at Emory University in Atlanta. "Or they sometimes would show two females having sex together, and would say, 'The females are very affectionate.' " Then in 1999, Bruce Bagemihl published "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" (St. Martin's Press), one of the first books of its kind to provide an overview of scholarly studies of same-sex behavior in animals. Bagemihl said homosexual behavior had been documented in some 450 species. Last summer, the book was cited by the American Psychiatric Association and other groups in a "friend of the court" brief submitted to the Supreme Court in Lawrence vs. Texas, a case challenging a Texas anti-sodomy law. The court struck down the law. In his book, Bagemihl describes homosexual activity in a broad spectrum of animals. He asserts that while same-sex behavior is sometimes found in captivity, it is actually seen more frequently in studies of animals in the wild. Among birds, for instance, studies show that 10 to 15 percent of female western gulls in some populations in the wild are homosexual. Among mammals, male and female bottlenose dolphins frequently engage in homosexual activity, both in captivity and in the wild. Homosexuality is particularly common among young male dolphin calves. One male may protect another that is resting or healing from wounds inflicted by a predator. When one partner dies, the other may search for a new male mate. Male and female rhesus macaques, a type of monkey, also exhibit homosexuality in captivity and in the wild. Males are affectionate to each other, touching, holding and embracing. Females smack their lips at each other and play games like hide-and-seek, peekaboo and follow the leader. And both sexes mount members of their own sex. Some scientists say homosexual behavior in animals is not necessarily about sex. Marlene Zuk, a professor of biology at UC Riverside and author of "Sexual Selections: What We Can and Can't Learn About Sex From Animals" (University of California Press, 2002), notes that scientists have speculated that homosexuality may have an evolutionary purpose, ensuring the survival of the species. By not producing their own offspring, homosexuals may help support or nurture their relatives' young. "That is a contribution to the gene pool," she said. Janet Mann, a professor of biology and psychology at Georgetown University who has studied same-sex behavior in dolphin calves, says their homosexuality "is about bond formation, not about being sexual for life." She said studies show that adult male dolphins form long-term alliances, sometimes in large groups. As adults, they cooperate to entice a single female and keep other males from her. Sometimes they share the female, or they may cooperate to help one male. "Male-male cooperation is extremely important," Mann said. The homosexual behavior of the young calves "could be practicing" for that later, crucial adult period, she added. Scientists warn about drawing conclusions about humans. "For some people, what animals do is a yardstick of what is and isn't natural," Vasey said. "They make a leap from saying if it's natural, it's morally and ethically desirable." But he added: "Infanticide is widespread in the animal kingdom. To jump from that to say it is desirable makes no sense. We shouldn't be using animals to craft moral and social policies for the kinds of human societies we want to live in. Animals don't take care of the elderly. I don't particularly think that should be a platform for closing down nursing homes." What the animal studies do show, Zuk observed, is that "sexuality is a lot broader term than people want to think." "You have this idea that the animal kingdom is strict, old-fashioned Roman Catholic," she said, "that they have sex just to procreate." In bonobos, she noted: "you see expressions of sex outside the period when females are fertile. Suddenly, you are beginning to see that sex is not necessarily about reproduction."

Comment Slashdot has confirmed:PWP is dying by poopbot (Score -1) 55

Happy Troll Tuesday!

Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered trolling community when recently Slashdot confirmed that, after several changes were made to production Slashcode, wide posts account for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all Slashdot posts. Coming on the heels of the latest verions of IE which make page-widening more difficult, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. the wide posts that we love are collapsing into the narrow posts that we are used to, as further exemplified by the lack of Slashbots complaining about difficulty reading Slashdot's articles.

You don't need to be a Klerck to predict PWP's future. The hand writing is on the wall: PWP faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for PWP because PWP is dying. Things are looking very bad for PWP. As many of us are already aware, PWP continues to be defeated by users with thresholds of 1 or higher. Mod points flow like a river of blood. Klerck's PWP-bot posts are the most endangered of them all, having been filtered early on because of their uniformity.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

PWP leader Klerck states that there are 7 wide posts in the average Slashdot article. How many non-wide crapflood posts are there? Let's see. The number of crapflood versus wide posts on Slahdot is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7*5 = 35 non-wide crapflood posts in every Slashdot article. Tacosnotting posts on Slashdot are about half of the volume of crapflood posts. Therefore there are about 17 tacosnotting posts per article. A recent article put Goatse.cx trolls at about 80 percent of total troll posts. Therefore there are a hell of a lot of homosexual trolls. This is consistent with the number of Goatse.cx Slashdot posts.

But Slashdot is only part of the picture. Due to the troubles at Slashdot, negative revenue and so on, the site will soon go out of business and many users will flock to alternative weblogs, where PWP is almost completely unknown. Trollaxor.com, the popular troll hangout, is also dying, its corpse sodomized in yet another Greek bath house.

All major surveys show that PWP has steadily declined in the scope of all troll posts. PWP is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If PWP is to survive at all it will be among Blog faggot using outdated versions of Slashcode. PWP continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, PWP is dead.

- posted by poopbot: the bot formerly known as pwpbot

1tEfh3AvCw Post #456

Slashdot Top Deals

The devil finds work for idle circuits to do.

Working...