This argument, though I do agree that morality and God are not mutually exclusive concepts, does miss one point: Denmark, Sweden, Japan... these are examples of homogeneous societies. In Japan you cannot become a citizen without being Japanese (or having a very good reason). Heterogeneous societies, such as the UK, USA and Brazil, tend to have higher crime rates and such problems.

This is not an anti-immigrant rant, just pointing out an aspect to these comparisons. Many Heterogeneous societies are not immigrant cultures anymore - many of the mixed cultures have been there for a long time. I suspect this just adds a level of complexity to a society that makes certain frictions and situations harder to avoid.

Also, rule of law is a very big factor. I live in Dubai, which has an 80% foreigner population. But there is little crime here (of the petty variety, at least), largely thanks to a pretty draconian justice system.

God is irrelevant in this argument (and anyone applying the No God = Rape argument is woefully naive about how societies function). What we should look at are the cultural values themselves and these are much more deep-seated than any deity. We should also consider population density and simple numbers. Places like India (very religious) and China (mixed to non-religious, depending on whether you poll citizen or state) don't have low crime rates partially thanks to such factors.

I feat this is becoming a bad trend amongst atheists: we are so eager to make our point and prove theists wrong (given we've had to stay in the closet for such a long time) that we are grasping at any straw to win people over. Richard Dawkins' God Delusion is full of this flawed 'all or nothing' logic. The reality of God's place in the world is somewhere very inbetween.

You can't simply remove an ancient concept (deity worship has been a part of us for at least 50,000 years) with logic and using shallow, bias logic is only making things worse. Live by example! Let others know you are an atheist and let them judge you accordingly. The people worth saving will see you are still a good person. The people who don't, well, they will never see reason no matter how good your position is.

The version I frequently hear is that Ford was supposed to fight the swordsman, but he had injured himself in an earlier scene. Unable to do the action sequence, he decided to shoot him instead.

Also, another version recounts that the boulder scene was actually very dangerous and few precautions were taken. Ford was not impressed with Spielberg, as he was led to believe the boulder weighed very little.

Yeah, to echo nosh0w's comment: chameleons change colour to show mood. The camouflage thing is a complete myth

This looks true. You see lots of labourers around J'burg doing similar stuff (though not with as many bricks).

Watching builders throw bricks up from the ground to a higher level is equally impressive.

Ah, on the nudity - it wasn't about male physique or keeping women out...

According to Larry Gonick's excellent Cartoon History of the Universe...

The Spartans used to train their males and females naked. Thus, when the Olympics started circa 776 BC, the Spartans took the traditions along with them and competed naked. Being very successful at the Olympics, the idea took hold with the other Greek states. See, it's a bit wrong to talk about the ancient Greeks as if they were one people. The states hardly ever got along and frequently fought each other.

Also an interesting tidbit - boxing was the only sport where you had to concede to have a winner. But Spartans didn't ever concede. Eventually they would boycott the boxing event (unless they knew they would win).

Ah, ever even owned a cat? They do stuff like that all the time.