You signed your name 'anon', but the sneaky right-wing Salon jackbooted Junta somehow included still your name.

They're coming to bus you away to the detention camps right now.

Run, I say, run... they're coming to take your civil liberties away.

I never thought I'd see the science of statistics receive such interest. What's next? The Chi-squared camp start fighting the maximum-entropy camp in a bid to see who really controls the normal distribution?

It seems unlikely that the mathematical parts of the arguments are going to be decided on the Salon letter pages. It's notoriously difficult to build a good intuition of margins of error and what happens when data lies outside of them. For starters, the margins of error are themselves prone to large errors. It's not uncommon to find results that are massively outside of the error estimates- for the simple reason that the error estimates themselves are often wrong.

In cases like these, the best that us normal Joes and Janes can do is often to try and understand what the expert concensus is amongst professional statisticians who have studied the matter.

It's true that you can find reputable statisticians on either side of this debate- but Manjoo indicates that the majority of recognized experts have not found significant proof to doubt the result of the election.

Does that mean that the election wasn't stolen? No, but extroadinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Kennedy is certainly making the extraordinary claims- but unfortunately he doesn't appear to have the cast-iron evidence required to substantiate those claims.

Others are welcome to continue investigating this matter- but they haven't yet produced the corpse.

Anyone, even a state who uses weapons on civillians that kill children, men and women is commiting an act of terrorism.

It will take a sea change in American culture and for the American media to accept this simple fact when applied to Israel, and I don't expect it to happen anytime soon.

Instead we have the eternal war on terror, whose sole result appears to have been to create a new generation of terrorists.

These thoughts are not original, but they are close to forbidden in this country.

Is there any other bit of fun and light humor that you'd like to deconstruct into dry flakes? How about 'Spongebob Square-pants', a pre-modernist post-millenialist trek into the sunset of humanity- a Kafkaesque nightmare?

Ask not who they're laughing at. They're laughing at you.

Using "none are" as opposed to "none is" is acceptable and even preferable. It is a commonly held but completely erroneous view amongst snobs that this constitutes a infraction of the English language. Do some research on this.

I'm writing you up a ticket for making a false accusation. Any further mistakes could risk you the loss of your adjectives for a week.

Bravo claims that "none" is derived from the contraction of "not one". Some research (Google) shows that it actually comes from the Old English "nan", which was used as far back as 888.

Yes, the term 'Grammar Nazi' is a little politically incorrect. Still, starting arguments about grammar sure beats invading Poland.

You would be correct about the etymology of 'Grammar Nazi'. Is it too much to assume that the readers of Salon should be versed in Seinfeld?

The attraction of Snakes on a Plane is quite simple. There are snakes- and they're on a plane! Plus, Samuel L. Jackson is usually excellent in any movie. I'm hoping the movie will be fun even in a non-ironic type of way.

I'm tired of all the big message movies. Even Superman has to be this big mythological beast these days. I could do without the cod-philosophy ('Hakes on a Plane?') that is used in even the stoopidest movies.

I'm confused- it seems that you're agreeing with me (the Grammar Nazi). I don't think I'll be sucking anything of yours anytime soon.

I would be amazed if more than 1% of abusive photographs are taken using traditional photographic film and sent off to commercial centers for development. As others have pointed out- digital cameras have become the new standard and this holds true multiplied by a million for people who want to take abusive photographs of children.

The mathematics of false positives would probably show that the vast majority of photographs that are turned into the police are completely innocuous. I don't have the numbers, but I'm sure that someone has done research into this.

You would probably have an equal chance of catching child abusers if you arrested random parents on the street. Some might object that this would infringe our civil liberties- but those whiners probably have something to hide.

As an atheist I can't think of a single person who more exemplifies peace, understanding and humanity than Desmond Tutu. Tutu has (according to Wikipedia) expressed solidarity with the plight of the Palestinians and called upon Israel to respect their human dignity.

There's a lot of politics and name-calling that gets dragged into any debate about Israel, but I'd like us all to remember our humanity. Politics is important, but it's not as important as our love and concern for each-other.

These are fairly random thoughts, but I can't help thinking that we've lost everything if we lose our humanity. How could anyone not read about children, men and women dying in Israel and Lebanon and not weep?