I was left handed as an infant, trained to be right handed by my parents. I suspect more people would be left handed if their parents had just let them be as babies.

Mikeyes, 
 
Got bad news for you. There is a disease called "Clinical Depression". It has gone under other names, but the fallback seems to be "Clinical Depression" To the best of our knowledge the cause appears to be a deficiency in the neurochemical seratonin, and for many of us this shortage is normal; it's how we are. 
 
Normal sadness has a cause. Normal sadness will pass with time and a bit of encouragement from others. Clinical Depression does not pass, and encouragement can actually make matters worse. I am, to put this simply, naturally disposed to see the dark side of things, and to treat even positive developments as bad news. That is the way I am. 
 
Before I can address your other points I first had to address your error concerning the validity of Clinical Depression as a disease.

If I weren't taking Fluoxetine I would not be functioning at all. Seriously, not functioning at all. I would very likely be dead. I will not say that anti-depressants are not misapplied, but neither are they being misapplied in all cases. For some people antidepressants are necessary to alleviate mood and restore function. 
 
Keep in mind that people differ in how they respond to medications, especially those that affect mood. For me Fluoxetine works well, for others it is contra-indicated. Some have no trouble with Paxil, I'm one of those who can't have caffeine with that drug because they have a synergistic effect on my tendency to anxiety attacks. 
 
The fact that people now receiving antidepressants don't really need them does not mean that everybody now receiving antidepressants don't need them. Some of us do. Being clinically depressed is not a matter of choice for everybody, and what we need for effective treatment is not always a matter to be dismissed with blithe talk and easy decisions.

Agnostic, 
 
You still jumped to conclusions. The quality of any product depends on how much effort is put into it. How much effort is put into it depends on what the making thinks it's worth putting into it. That, in turn, depends on how much the manufacturer expects to get out of it. He does not expect much out of it, he won't put much into it. 
 
So it comes down to a question of motivation. Low motivation, low quality. But recompense is not the sole determinant of motivation. Pride plays a big role, as does upbringing. Reputation can encourage high quality work. This covers peer pressure, family and friends, even the reaction of enemies can impact how you approach a project. 
 
Free means cheap is a simplification, and like most simplifications it is invalid.

Agnostic, 
 
I haven't seen so much jumping to conclusions since the last time I read a creationist's spiel on the theory of evolution. What evidence do you have that more free stuff leads to a lowering of quality, or are you basing your conclusion on the fact that free stuff tends to be cheap. 
 
Free stuff tends to be cheap because of cost. In those cases where the cost of providing the item is low, then free items need not be cheap. It comes down to a question of the sort of impression the provider wishes to give. In the case of computer files the cost is narrowed down to the person or persons who actually worked on the project, with storage and distribution taking up a miniscule part of the picture. It's when, say, a PDF file is printed up, bound, and shipped that we start talking about real costs. 
 
A number of book publishers give away electronic versions of their books, because it leads to hard copy sales. And we are talking about quality work for the most part. Then, as others have pointed out, there is the open source software movement. The Linux operating system is available on the web for free. Yet people pay good money for precompiled versions on CD or DVD. Because they see value in it. The point is, free does not mean things must degrade in value. What matters there is what we are talking about, and the value the manufacturer places on the item he is making available for free.

I think a similar study of tasmanian devils would produce interesting results. A number of people who work with tazzies have noted a tendency to docility and emotional attachment with humans in the animals in their care.

Over at Gene Expression Fils Razid noted that the two different conclusions were drawn from different data. I suspect that an analysis using all available data would produce a third conclusion. And that if one included all relevant data a different conclusion would be reached. 
 
We have a habit of selecting that which supports our thinking, and shying away from observations and evidence that contradicts it. This being as true of those working in genetics as in any other field of inquiry.

In the Church Universal and Triumphant (CUT) a variant of this is cutting edge thinking.

Does the mutation in question cause the appearance of skeletal traits similar to skeletal traits found in Homo habilis and some Australopithecine specimens?

I noticed the island of dark hued people in northern Scandinavia. Has this persisted up to today, and has anyone had a look at the sociology and genetics behind it?

Yeah. but i wonder: a lot of hard leftists seem to go through multiple "phases" in their life. e.g., a lot of the ex-communists who turned into conservatives and what not. i wonder if the temporal variation is part of their ability to "switch" a lot? in contrast, it seems fewer conservatives became communists later in life. 
 
Discordian Philosopher and game designer Steve Jackson reached a most interesting understanding (cf the Illuminati card game). That being that one can be a communist and conservative. As witness the old Soviet Politburo. Indeed, most every institution soon becomes conservative, even traditionalist, within a generation of its foundation. No group, no matter what its official platform, is ever completely liberal or conservative.

Razib, 
 
Then you have leftists, who tend to be conformist, doctrinaire, and socialist. Socially conservative in many respects as well.

For the views of an accidental male to female transexual (Lipitor has been implicated) see Zoe Brain's post on the matter. Scroll down and you should find it.

I wonder, what about the amygdalas of dogs and cats?

Does evolution proceed by this, that, or the other thing? 
 
Yes. 
 
When you have a complex process such as evolution you cannot be limited to one procedure. One change to a gene may result in a small change to the organism, or to a large change to the organism. The deletion of a protein marker in cell membranes that allows the entry of HIV RNA, or a modification in the development of the hindlimbs or example. 
 
Look into the matter of the newly discovered cnidarian worm, and ask youself, "what happened in later animals to eliminate the slime mold phase which this worm apparently experiences under the proper conditions?

According to what I've been able to find on the animal, it's included with Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii. In so far as P. t. schweinfurthii is being considered for species status (Pan Schweinfurthii) the "lion killer" chimp would likely be promoted to subspecies (Pan schweinfurthii leomortis?). 
 
One thing to note about these animals is that they have a sagittal crest. A skeletal feature not found in any other population of chimpanzees. Along with other unique traits this may qualify them for species status themselves (Pan leomortis?) Just when you think you've got the hooligans figured out. 
 
BTW, P. t. schweinfurthii was the animal Jane Goodall did her initial studies on.

It's politics. Through generosity the alpha male shows how effective he is as a leader. It also serves to bind others to his leadership insofar as they become beholden to him for their good fortune. 
 
Simply put, those he favors with gifts now have a reason to see him succeed, and so will act to help ensure his success.

So drugs to help with concentration shouldn't be used by people with ADD? 
 
The fact certain disorders are over diagnosed does not mean all such diagnoses are wrong. Some of us do have Social Anxiety Disorder, and so a medicaton such as Effexor is required for any sort of functioning. 
 
Yes, much of the focus on pathologies is misplaced, but don't let the obsessed determine your research interests in reaction to their aims.

Spirits by their very nature are not scientific subjects.

Of course neanderthals were human, they were just a different species of human. 
 
And if the almas are neanderthals, then the neanderthal is a different species of human.