I’m a big amateur consumer of science news. I tend to report on the studies about the origin of sexuality because of a (years-long) debate with the ML about homosexual rights. The real heart of the question is: “Maximum Leader, IF homosexuality is NOT a choice, but biologically intrinsic, would this change your position on gay rights?” The dear Maximum Leader refuses to countenance such a development. And I think it says volumes that the biogted right won’t even consider the possibility.

If the Maximum Leade cares to visit the archives, he will note that he (rather cleverly as a debate tactic) continually resorted to the single-gene argument when he and the BigHo and I got into it last time. No one has ever focused on a single gene explanation except the Maximum Leader.

At any rate, I’m not a blind adherant, but do tend to believe, as an amateur, the larger consensus of the scientific community. For example, I’m more likely to follow medical advice from an MD than from a quack. The same applies when considering policy on issues like global warming and gay rights.

Now, I do tend to err a bit on the layman side on the food I eat. I haven’t seen anything conclusive about chemicals and antibiotics lingering in feedlot beef or industrially produced milk, but I get a bit of (perhaps irrational) heebie-jeebies from the idea; enough so that I go through the considerable amount of work to produce these goods myself.

Mike, thanks for the rogue-wave link. Cool stuff. You should do more marine topics, you sailor you. At least tell your readers about the “Quibron Bay,” the commissioning of which will be one of the first acts of the Mike World Order.

Here is a cool link I found through that site: Mars in 90 days.

In the Mark World Order, we would be on Mars in five years. Go Zubrin!