<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_05_30_0327219</id>
	<title>Human Language Gene Changes How Mice Squeak</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1243707000000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>archatheist writes <i>"Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany have engineered a mouse whose FOXP2 gene has been swapped out for a different (human) version.  This is interesting because the gene is implicated in human language, and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/29/science/29mouse.html">this has changed how mice squeak</a>.  'In a region of the brain called the basal ganglia, known in people to be involved in language, the humanized mice grew nerve cells that had a more complex structure. Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers. The humanized baby mice, when isolated, made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch, among other differences, Dr. Enard says. Dr. Enard argues that putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps, our closest living relatives.' The <a href="http://www.cell.com/fulltext/S0092-8674(09)00378-X">academic paper</a> was published in <em>Cell</em>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>archatheist writes " Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig , Germany have engineered a mouse whose FOXP2 gene has been swapped out for a different ( human ) version .
This is interesting because the gene is implicated in human language , and this has changed how mice squeak .
'In a region of the brain called the basal ganglia , known in people to be involved in language , the humanized mice grew nerve cells that had a more complex structure .
Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers .
The humanized baby mice , when isolated , made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch , among other differences , Dr. Enard says .
Dr. Enard argues that putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps , our closest living relatives .
' The academic paper was published in Cell .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>archatheist writes "Researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany have engineered a mouse whose FOXP2 gene has been swapped out for a different (human) version.
This is interesting because the gene is implicated in human language, and this has changed how mice squeak.
'In a region of the brain called the basal ganglia, known in people to be involved in language, the humanized mice grew nerve cells that had a more complex structure.
Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers.
The humanized baby mice, when isolated, made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch, among other differences, Dr. Enard says.
Dr. Enard argues that putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps, our closest living relatives.
' The academic paper was published in Cell.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147727</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>tobiah</author>
	<datestamp>1243714680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...Mainly, that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans, it would show us if they possess a consciousness, can reason, and what emotions that they can feel...</p></div><p>Cognitive linguistics suggests that consciousness is inextricably linked to language, and that an inability to express a thought represents, to some extent, an absence of the thought. Thus the sanctity of an animal's life is best expressed by the articulate expression of the animal.  My personal experience is that the expression tends to be somewhat... violent.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Mainly , that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans , it would show us if they possess a consciousness , can reason , and what emotions that they can feel...Cognitive linguistics suggests that consciousness is inextricably linked to language , and that an inability to express a thought represents , to some extent , an absence of the thought .
Thus the sanctity of an animal 's life is best expressed by the articulate expression of the animal .
My personal experience is that the expression tends to be somewhat... violent .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...Mainly, that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans, it would show us if they possess a consciousness, can reason, and what emotions that they can feel...Cognitive linguistics suggests that consciousness is inextricably linked to language, and that an inability to express a thought represents, to some extent, an absence of the thought.
Thus the sanctity of an animal's life is best expressed by the articulate expression of the animal.
My personal experience is that the expression tends to be somewhat... violent.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147695</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>mellestad</author>
	<datestamp>1243714260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think I would rather know than put my head in the sand.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I would rather know than put my head in the sand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I would rather know than put my head in the sand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149639</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1243701060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and <b>if they don't someone else will do it anyway</b>).</p></div></blockquote><p>Ain't the truth a pain? Sorry. Many people before you have proposed banning certain avenues of research, and science <i>always</i> wins.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of scientists ( and other people ) seem to think just because it can be done , it should be done ( and if they do n't someone else will do it anyway ) .Ai n't the truth a pain ?
Sorry. Many people before you have proposed banning certain avenues of research , and science always wins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and if they don't someone else will do it anyway).Ain't the truth a pain?
Sorry. Many people before you have proposed banning certain avenues of research, and science always wins.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148053</id>
	<title>Re:Massive reverse engineering job</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1243677060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Today's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millennium</p></div><p>Maybe not, high-throughput molecular biology is getting better all the time.</p><p>-With the genome sequenced we have a rough idea of how many genes there are and can find homologies between genes, so you can begin clustering genes by presumed function.</p><p>-With mutagenesis screens, you can sometimes identify most of the genes involved in a given process.</p><p>-High-throughput protein interaction studies can identify complexes, grouping proteins into functional groups.</p><p>-There's an attempt to make a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knockout\_mice" title="wikipedia.org">knockout mouse</a> [wikipedia.org] for every gene in their genome.</p><p>None of those will give you the full story for any one gene, nor will any give you good stories for most of the genes by themselves.  But used together, we can have a rough idea of what genes do what, and can take a closer look at what we need to.  This gene, FOXP2 for example, was not chosen at random.</p><p>And that's just with technology I've heard of that exists now.  I don't know much about genomics, and we certainly are going to continue to invent ways to get research done faster.  I think the human genome project came in under budget and ahead of schedule largely due to technology that was advanced as the project was underway.  It's too early to make such long forecasts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Today 's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millenniumMaybe not , high-throughput molecular biology is getting better all the time.-With the genome sequenced we have a rough idea of how many genes there are and can find homologies between genes , so you can begin clustering genes by presumed function.-With mutagenesis screens , you can sometimes identify most of the genes involved in a given process.-High-throughput protein interaction studies can identify complexes , grouping proteins into functional groups.-There 's an attempt to make a knockout mouse [ wikipedia.org ] for every gene in their genome.None of those will give you the full story for any one gene , nor will any give you good stories for most of the genes by themselves .
But used together , we can have a rough idea of what genes do what , and can take a closer look at what we need to .
This gene , FOXP2 for example , was not chosen at random.And that 's just with technology I 've heard of that exists now .
I do n't know much about genomics , and we certainly are going to continue to invent ways to get research done faster .
I think the human genome project came in under budget and ahead of schedule largely due to technology that was advanced as the project was underway .
It 's too early to make such long forecasts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millenniumMaybe not, high-throughput molecular biology is getting better all the time.-With the genome sequenced we have a rough idea of how many genes there are and can find homologies between genes, so you can begin clustering genes by presumed function.-With mutagenesis screens, you can sometimes identify most of the genes involved in a given process.-High-throughput protein interaction studies can identify complexes, grouping proteins into functional groups.-There's an attempt to make a knockout mouse [wikipedia.org] for every gene in their genome.None of those will give you the full story for any one gene, nor will any give you good stories for most of the genes by themselves.
But used together, we can have a rough idea of what genes do what, and can take a closer look at what we need to.
This gene, FOXP2 for example, was not chosen at random.And that's just with technology I've heard of that exists now.
I don't know much about genomics, and we certainly are going to continue to invent ways to get research done faster.
I think the human genome project came in under budget and ahead of schedule largely due to technology that was advanced as the project was underway.
It's too early to make such long forecasts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147501</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243714380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Emotions or not, I'm still eating cows.</p></div><p>A large dairy animal approached Zaphod Beeblebrox's table, <br>
a large fat meaty quadruped of the bovine type with<br>
large watery eyes, small horns and what might almost have been an ingratiating smile on its lips.<br>
<br>
'Good evening', it lowed and sat back heavily on its haunches, 'I am the main Dish of the Day. May I interest you in the parts of my body?' <br>
<br>
It harrumphed and gurgled a bit, wriggled its hind quarters in to a more comfortable position and gazed peacefully at them.<br>
<br>
Its gaze was met by looks of startled bewilderment from Arthur and Trillian, a resigned shrug from Ford Prefect and naked hunger from Zaphod Beeblebrox.<br>
<br>
'Something off the shoulder perhaps?' suggested the animal, 'Braised in a white wine sauce?'<br>
<br>
'Er, your shoulder?' said Arthur in a horrified whisper.<br>
<br>
'But naturally my shoulder, sir,' mooed the animal contentedly, 'nobody else's is mine to offer.'<br>
<br>
Zaphod leapt to his feet and started prodding and feeling the animal's shoulder appreciatively.<br>
<br>
'Or the rump is very good,' murmured the animal. 'I've been exercising it and eating plenty of grain, so there's a lot of good meat there.' <br>
<br>
It gave a mellow grunt, gurgled again and started to chew the cud. It swallowed the cud again.<br>
<br>
'Or a casselore of me perhaps?' it added.<br>
<br>
'You mean this animal actually wants us to eat it?' whispered Trillian to Ford.<br>
<br>
'Me?' said Ford, with a glazed look in his eyes, 'I don't mean anything.'<br>
<br>
'That's absolutely horrible,' exclaimed Arthur, 'the most revolting thing I've ever heard.'<br>
<br>
'What's the problem Earthman?' said Zaphod, now transfering his attention to the animal's enormous rump.<br>
<br>
'I just don't want to eat an animal that's standing there inviting me to,' said Arthur, 'It's heartless.'<br>
<br>
'Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,' said Zaphod.<br>
<br>
'That's not the point,' Arthur protested. Then he thought about it <br>
for a moment. 'Alright,' he said, 'maybe it is the point. I don't <br>
care, I'm not going to think about it now. I'll just<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... er<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I <br>
think I'll just have a green salad,' he muttered.<br>
<br>
'May I urge you to consider my liver?' asked the animal, 'it must be very rich and tender by now, I've been force-feeding myself for months.'<br>
<br>
'A green salad,' said Arthur emphatically.<br>
<br>
'A green salad?' said the animal, rolling his eyes disapprovingly at Arthur.<br>
<br>
'Are you going to tell me,' said Arthur, 'that I shouldn't have green salad?'<br>
<br>
'Well,' said the animal, 'I know many vegetables that are<br>
very clear on that point. Which is why it was eventually<br>
decided to cut through the whoile tangled problem and breed<br>
an animal that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of<br>
saying so clearly and distinctly. And here I am.'<br>
<br>
It managed a very slight bow.<br>
<br>
'Glass of water please,' said Arthur.<br>
<br>
'Look,' said Zaphod, 'we want to eat, we don't want to make a meal of the issues. Four rare stakes please, and hurry. We haven't eaten in five hundred and sevebty-six thousand million years.'<br>
<br>
The animal staggered to its feet. It gave a mellow gurgle. 'A very wise coice, sir, if I may say so. Very good,' it said, 'I'll just nip off and shoot myself.'<br>
<br>
He turned and gave a friendly wink to Arthur. 'Don't worry, sir,' he said, 'I'll be very humane.'<br>
<br>
It waddled unhurriedly off to the kitchen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Emotions or not , I 'm still eating cows.A large dairy animal approached Zaphod Beeblebrox 's table , a large fat meaty quadruped of the bovine type with large watery eyes , small horns and what might almost have been an ingratiating smile on its lips .
'Good evening ' , it lowed and sat back heavily on its haunches , 'I am the main Dish of the Day .
May I interest you in the parts of my body ?
' It harrumphed and gurgled a bit , wriggled its hind quarters in to a more comfortable position and gazed peacefully at them .
Its gaze was met by looks of startled bewilderment from Arthur and Trillian , a resigned shrug from Ford Prefect and naked hunger from Zaphod Beeblebrox .
'Something off the shoulder perhaps ?
' suggested the animal , 'Braised in a white wine sauce ?
' 'Er , your shoulder ?
' said Arthur in a horrified whisper .
'But naturally my shoulder , sir, ' mooed the animal contentedly , 'nobody else 's is mine to offer .
' Zaphod leapt to his feet and started prodding and feeling the animal 's shoulder appreciatively .
'Or the rump is very good, ' murmured the animal .
'I 've been exercising it and eating plenty of grain , so there 's a lot of good meat there .
' It gave a mellow grunt , gurgled again and started to chew the cud .
It swallowed the cud again .
'Or a casselore of me perhaps ?
' it added .
'You mean this animal actually wants us to eat it ?
' whispered Trillian to Ford .
'Me ? ' said Ford , with a glazed look in his eyes , 'I do n't mean anything .
' 'That 's absolutely horrible, ' exclaimed Arthur , 'the most revolting thing I 've ever heard .
' 'What 's the problem Earthman ?
' said Zaphod , now transfering his attention to the animal 's enormous rump .
'I just do n't want to eat an animal that 's standing there inviting me to, ' said Arthur , 'It 's heartless .
' 'Better than eating an animal that does n't want to be eaten, ' said Zaphod .
'That 's not the point, ' Arthur protested .
Then he thought about it for a moment .
'Alright, ' he said , 'maybe it is the point .
I do n't care , I 'm not going to think about it now .
I 'll just ... er ... I think I 'll just have a green salad, ' he muttered .
'May I urge you to consider my liver ?
' asked the animal , 'it must be very rich and tender by now , I 've been force-feeding myself for months .
' 'A green salad, ' said Arthur emphatically .
'A green salad ?
' said the animal , rolling his eyes disapprovingly at Arthur .
'Are you going to tell me, ' said Arthur , 'that I should n't have green salad ?
' 'Well, ' said the animal , 'I know many vegetables that are very clear on that point .
Which is why it was eventually decided to cut through the whoile tangled problem and breed an animal that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of saying so clearly and distinctly .
And here I am .
' It managed a very slight bow .
'Glass of water please, ' said Arthur .
'Look, ' said Zaphod , 'we want to eat , we do n't want to make a meal of the issues .
Four rare stakes please , and hurry .
We have n't eaten in five hundred and sevebty-six thousand million years .
' The animal staggered to its feet .
It gave a mellow gurgle .
'A very wise coice , sir , if I may say so .
Very good, ' it said , 'I 'll just nip off and shoot myself .
' He turned and gave a friendly wink to Arthur .
'Do n't worry , sir, ' he said , 'I 'll be very humane .
' It waddled unhurriedly off to the kitchen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Emotions or not, I'm still eating cows.A large dairy animal approached Zaphod Beeblebrox's table, 
a large fat meaty quadruped of the bovine type with
large watery eyes, small horns and what might almost have been an ingratiating smile on its lips.
'Good evening', it lowed and sat back heavily on its haunches, 'I am the main Dish of the Day.
May I interest you in the parts of my body?
' 

It harrumphed and gurgled a bit, wriggled its hind quarters in to a more comfortable position and gazed peacefully at them.
Its gaze was met by looks of startled bewilderment from Arthur and Trillian, a resigned shrug from Ford Prefect and naked hunger from Zaphod Beeblebrox.
'Something off the shoulder perhaps?
' suggested the animal, 'Braised in a white wine sauce?
'

'Er, your shoulder?
' said Arthur in a horrified whisper.
'But naturally my shoulder, sir,' mooed the animal contentedly, 'nobody else's is mine to offer.
'

Zaphod leapt to his feet and started prodding and feeling the animal's shoulder appreciatively.
'Or the rump is very good,' murmured the animal.
'I've been exercising it and eating plenty of grain, so there's a lot of good meat there.
' 

It gave a mellow grunt, gurgled again and started to chew the cud.
It swallowed the cud again.
'Or a casselore of me perhaps?
' it added.
'You mean this animal actually wants us to eat it?
' whispered Trillian to Ford.
'Me?' said Ford, with a glazed look in his eyes, 'I don't mean anything.
'

'That's absolutely horrible,' exclaimed Arthur, 'the most revolting thing I've ever heard.
'

'What's the problem Earthman?
' said Zaphod, now transfering his attention to the animal's enormous rump.
'I just don't want to eat an animal that's standing there inviting me to,' said Arthur, 'It's heartless.
'

'Better than eating an animal that doesn't want to be eaten,' said Zaphod.
'That's not the point,' Arthur protested.
Then he thought about it 
for a moment.
'Alright,' he said, 'maybe it is the point.
I don't 
care, I'm not going to think about it now.
I'll just ... er ... I 
think I'll just have a green salad,' he muttered.
'May I urge you to consider my liver?
' asked the animal, 'it must be very rich and tender by now, I've been force-feeding myself for months.
'

'A green salad,' said Arthur emphatically.
'A green salad?
' said the animal, rolling his eyes disapprovingly at Arthur.
'Are you going to tell me,' said Arthur, 'that I shouldn't have green salad?
'

'Well,' said the animal, 'I know many vegetables that are
very clear on that point.
Which is why it was eventually
decided to cut through the whoile tangled problem and breed
an animal that actually wanted to be eaten and was capable of
saying so clearly and distinctly.
And here I am.
'

It managed a very slight bow.
'Glass of water please,' said Arthur.
'Look,' said Zaphod, 'we want to eat, we don't want to make a meal of the issues.
Four rare stakes please, and hurry.
We haven't eaten in five hundred and sevebty-six thousand million years.
'

The animal staggered to its feet.
It gave a mellow gurgle.
'A very wise coice, sir, if I may say so.
Very good,' it said, 'I'll just nip off and shoot myself.
'

He turned and gave a friendly wink to Arthur.
'Don't worry, sir,' he said, 'I'll be very humane.
'

It waddled unhurriedly off to the kitchen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147583</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148139</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>Briareos</author>
	<datestamp>1243678740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So THAT's what really happened to <a href="http://samandmax.wikia.com/wiki/Timmy\_Two-Teeth" title="wikia.com">Timmy Two-Teeth</a> [wikia.com]!</p><p>Those bastards!</p><p><i>np: Barbara Morgenstern - Nichts Muss (Nichts Muss)</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So THAT 's what really happened to Timmy Two-Teeth [ wikia.com ] ! Those bastards ! np : Barbara Morgenstern - Nichts Muss ( Nichts Muss )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So THAT's what really happened to Timmy Two-Teeth [wikia.com]!Those bastards!np: Barbara Morgenstern - Nichts Muss (Nichts Muss)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148193</id>
	<title>Good Data Points, Not So Good Connections</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1243680600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TF(academic)A is a very well done piece of work. I'm glad to see this, as opposed to the junior high school comprehension level press releases usually presented as science. As such, my criticisms are offered respectfully.</p><p>The FOXP2 gene cannot be said to be directly involved in language. The referenced works state that altering it disrupts some aspects of language production. There are many more ways that disruptions can occur through third variables or more general systems. In this case, altering the gene causes alteration in the dopamine system, which feeds the spiny neurons. Dopaminergic activity on spiny neurons causes inhibitory signals in the gamma range (~40 HZ) to be sent to the neurons in Hebbian cellular assemblies (a primary processing unit), synchronizing them and causing them to perform their function. This may well happen in the basal ganglia, but also happens over much of the cortex. This is a general system, responsible for a great deal of brain function. To claim it is part of language is not wrong, but is improper in that it is inaccurate due to over-specificity. As evidence, the well studied dopaminergic disorder Parkinson's does cause language disruption as noted in TFA, but clearly does so only as a specific example of a global phenomenon.</p><p>Similarly, specific changes due to specific allele substitutions can only be said to be true if and only if substituting other alleles into the same locations do not cause similar changes. There is no evidence that the example referenced is as specific as is implied by the statement as presented.</p><p>The statement that studying mice as 'the only feasible way' to study the relationship between humans and chimps appears so skewed that I wonder if it is a misstatement or misinterpretation. In any case, direct comparison studies have been done with excellent results. My old boss at NIH did volumetric comparisons on chimps brains using MRI, looking for left/right asymmetry in the language areas. In all of a dozen or so cases, he found it, to a degree similar to that in humans. In all but one cases, the left was greater than the right, also as found in humans. The one exception is not a difference, but rather a supporting similarity. The language centers are usually on the left because they are usually contralateral to the dominant hand, usually the right. In a dozen or so humans, chances are one or so will be left handed, with language centers on the right, just as was seen in the chimps. Studying mice is certainly fruitful and the results may well generalize to primate comparison studies. But to say it's the only feasible way to compare primate data is very wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TF ( academic ) A is a very well done piece of work .
I 'm glad to see this , as opposed to the junior high school comprehension level press releases usually presented as science .
As such , my criticisms are offered respectfully.The FOXP2 gene can not be said to be directly involved in language .
The referenced works state that altering it disrupts some aspects of language production .
There are many more ways that disruptions can occur through third variables or more general systems .
In this case , altering the gene causes alteration in the dopamine system , which feeds the spiny neurons .
Dopaminergic activity on spiny neurons causes inhibitory signals in the gamma range ( ~ 40 HZ ) to be sent to the neurons in Hebbian cellular assemblies ( a primary processing unit ) , synchronizing them and causing them to perform their function .
This may well happen in the basal ganglia , but also happens over much of the cortex .
This is a general system , responsible for a great deal of brain function .
To claim it is part of language is not wrong , but is improper in that it is inaccurate due to over-specificity .
As evidence , the well studied dopaminergic disorder Parkinson 's does cause language disruption as noted in TFA , but clearly does so only as a specific example of a global phenomenon.Similarly , specific changes due to specific allele substitutions can only be said to be true if and only if substituting other alleles into the same locations do not cause similar changes .
There is no evidence that the example referenced is as specific as is implied by the statement as presented.The statement that studying mice as 'the only feasible way ' to study the relationship between humans and chimps appears so skewed that I wonder if it is a misstatement or misinterpretation .
In any case , direct comparison studies have been done with excellent results .
My old boss at NIH did volumetric comparisons on chimps brains using MRI , looking for left/right asymmetry in the language areas .
In all of a dozen or so cases , he found it , to a degree similar to that in humans .
In all but one cases , the left was greater than the right , also as found in humans .
The one exception is not a difference , but rather a supporting similarity .
The language centers are usually on the left because they are usually contralateral to the dominant hand , usually the right .
In a dozen or so humans , chances are one or so will be left handed , with language centers on the right , just as was seen in the chimps .
Studying mice is certainly fruitful and the results may well generalize to primate comparison studies .
But to say it 's the only feasible way to compare primate data is very wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TF(academic)A is a very well done piece of work.
I'm glad to see this, as opposed to the junior high school comprehension level press releases usually presented as science.
As such, my criticisms are offered respectfully.The FOXP2 gene cannot be said to be directly involved in language.
The referenced works state that altering it disrupts some aspects of language production.
There are many more ways that disruptions can occur through third variables or more general systems.
In this case, altering the gene causes alteration in the dopamine system, which feeds the spiny neurons.
Dopaminergic activity on spiny neurons causes inhibitory signals in the gamma range (~40 HZ) to be sent to the neurons in Hebbian cellular assemblies (a primary processing unit), synchronizing them and causing them to perform their function.
This may well happen in the basal ganglia, but also happens over much of the cortex.
This is a general system, responsible for a great deal of brain function.
To claim it is part of language is not wrong, but is improper in that it is inaccurate due to over-specificity.
As evidence, the well studied dopaminergic disorder Parkinson's does cause language disruption as noted in TFA, but clearly does so only as a specific example of a global phenomenon.Similarly, specific changes due to specific allele substitutions can only be said to be true if and only if substituting other alleles into the same locations do not cause similar changes.
There is no evidence that the example referenced is as specific as is implied by the statement as presented.The statement that studying mice as 'the only feasible way' to study the relationship between humans and chimps appears so skewed that I wonder if it is a misstatement or misinterpretation.
In any case, direct comparison studies have been done with excellent results.
My old boss at NIH did volumetric comparisons on chimps brains using MRI, looking for left/right asymmetry in the language areas.
In all of a dozen or so cases, he found it, to a degree similar to that in humans.
In all but one cases, the left was greater than the right, also as found in humans.
The one exception is not a difference, but rather a supporting similarity.
The language centers are usually on the left because they are usually contralateral to the dominant hand, usually the right.
In a dozen or so humans, chances are one or so will be left handed, with language centers on the right, just as was seen in the chimps.
Studying mice is certainly fruitful and the results may well generalize to primate comparison studies.
But to say it's the only feasible way to compare primate data is very wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147717</id>
	<title>Narf!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243714500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Pinky, are you thinking what I'm thinking?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Pinky , are you thinking what I 'm thinking ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Pinky, are you thinking what I'm thinking?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147599</id>
	<title>Talk to the animals</title>
	<author>gringofrijolero</author>
	<datestamp>1243626060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come out and take it, you dirty, yellow-bellied rat, or I'll give it to you through the door!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come out and take it , you dirty , yellow-bellied rat , or I 'll give it to you through the door !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come out and take it, you dirty, yellow-bellied rat, or I'll give it to you through the door!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148579</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243688160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work."</p><p>We already have that, it's called america.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work .
" We already have that , it 's called america .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work.
"We already have that, it's called america.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149751</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>DNS-and-BIND</author>
	<datestamp>1243702020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson's dissertation. Koko took the signs for 'apple' and 'drink' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice'</i> <p>The plural of anecdote is not data.  The 'research' done on Koko was nothing but grant-draining.  Anyone can teach an ape to copy - we even have a specific word in our language to describe this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson 's dissertation .
Koko took the signs for 'apple ' and 'drink ' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice ' The plural of anecdote is not data .
The 'research ' done on Koko was nothing but grant-draining .
Anyone can teach an ape to copy - we even have a specific word in our language to describe this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson's dissertation.
Koko took the signs for 'apple' and 'drink' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice' The plural of anecdote is not data.
The 'research' done on Koko was nothing but grant-draining.
Anyone can teach an ape to copy - we even have a specific word in our language to describe this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</id>
	<title>Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Afforess</author>
	<datestamp>1243625280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although this kind of research is interesting, the final results of this would have wide ranging implications that I would rather avoid. Mainly, that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans, it would show us if they possess a consciousness, can reason, and what emotions that they can feel. This would either prove the sanctity of animal life or deny it, ultimately; I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although this kind of research is interesting , the final results of this would have wide ranging implications that I would rather avoid .
Mainly , that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans , it would show us if they possess a consciousness , can reason , and what emotions that they can feel .
This would either prove the sanctity of animal life or deny it , ultimately ; I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although this kind of research is interesting, the final results of this would have wide ranging implications that I would rather avoid.
Mainly, that is if animals were allowed to converse in a common language with humans, it would show us if they possess a consciousness, can reason, and what emotions that they can feel.
This would either prove the sanctity of animal life or deny it, ultimately; I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148135</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243678740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Moral obligations?"</p><p>Morals are things built into our brains as a way to make us more viable as social animals. Animals that want to work together as a group, rather than murder each other over who gets that piece of meat, are more likely to survive.</p><p>The thing is, our "built-in" morals are designed for a situation humanity hasn't lived in for about 10,000 years. When you try to apply them to many modern situations (Is downloading an MP3 theft?) they simply don't work anymore. Worse yet, the labels we try to apply to these modern situations as "Right" or "Wrong" are completely arbitrary and serve no purpose except to help push agendas.</p><p>With a decreasing number of exceptions (Are we going to murder homeless people to get those brain cells?), you can't judge things in our society based on pure "ethics" anymore. It's just not that simple. The only thing you can do is look at the consequences of your actions and judge how they support or conflict with your goals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Moral obligations ?
" Morals are things built into our brains as a way to make us more viable as social animals .
Animals that want to work together as a group , rather than murder each other over who gets that piece of meat , are more likely to survive.The thing is , our " built-in " morals are designed for a situation humanity has n't lived in for about 10,000 years .
When you try to apply them to many modern situations ( Is downloading an MP3 theft ?
) they simply do n't work anymore .
Worse yet , the labels we try to apply to these modern situations as " Right " or " Wrong " are completely arbitrary and serve no purpose except to help push agendas.With a decreasing number of exceptions ( Are we going to murder homeless people to get those brain cells ?
) , you ca n't judge things in our society based on pure " ethics " anymore .
It 's just not that simple .
The only thing you can do is look at the consequences of your actions and judge how they support or conflict with your goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Moral obligations?
"Morals are things built into our brains as a way to make us more viable as social animals.
Animals that want to work together as a group, rather than murder each other over who gets that piece of meat, are more likely to survive.The thing is, our "built-in" morals are designed for a situation humanity hasn't lived in for about 10,000 years.
When you try to apply them to many modern situations (Is downloading an MP3 theft?
) they simply don't work anymore.
Worse yet, the labels we try to apply to these modern situations as "Right" or "Wrong" are completely arbitrary and serve no purpose except to help push agendas.With a decreasing number of exceptions (Are we going to murder homeless people to get those brain cells?
), you can't judge things in our society based on pure "ethics" anymore.
It's just not that simple.
The only thing you can do is look at the consequences of your actions and judge how they support or conflict with your goals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Z00L00K</author>
	<datestamp>1243716360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists.</p><p>This is an interesting part of science, even if it's not always morally "right". The outcome should be that we will learn more about ourselves and to design better drugs to treat illnesses.</p><p>But the more worrying kind of action here is that it also invites to tampering with genes that can make humans meek and controllable. A new level of slavery can be developed. Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work. If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it! And super-humans that can exceed all current Olympic records.</p><p>Let's just say that we live in interesting times!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists.This is an interesting part of science , even if it 's not always morally " right " .
The outcome should be that we will learn more about ourselves and to design better drugs to treat illnesses.But the more worrying kind of action here is that it also invites to tampering with genes that can make humans meek and controllable .
A new level of slavery can be developed .
Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work .
If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it !
And super-humans that can exceed all current Olympic records.Let 's just say that we live in interesting times !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists.This is an interesting part of science, even if it's not always morally "right".
The outcome should be that we will learn more about ourselves and to design better drugs to treat illnesses.But the more worrying kind of action here is that it also invites to tampering with genes that can make humans meek and controllable.
A new level of slavery can be developed.
Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work.
If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it!
And super-humans that can exceed all current Olympic records.Let's just say that we live in interesting times!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148121</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>interkin3tic</author>
	<datestamp>1243678260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But truly, where is the line? What about injecting human brain cells into mice? How about into chimps?</p> </div><p>The differences between mouse, chimp, and human neurons are less significant than the higher organization of neurons.  I couldn't find figures for numbers of neurons in chimps or mice, but <a href="http://faculty.washington.edu/chudler/facts.html" title="washington.edu">this website</a> [washington.edu] indicates that humans have around a hundred billion neurons in the brain, the human brain weighing 1.3-1.4kg.  The chimp brain weighs 420 grams.  We have more cells in our brains than mice do in their entire body.</p><p>Injecting human neurons into a mouse?  Wouldn't do anything like make the mouse self aware.  It would most likely cause seizures in the mouse.  I have no moral objections to it, as long as it was done with a clear research goal.  Otherwise, it's probably my tax dollars at work, and those immunocompromised mice they'd be using are expensive to maintain.</p><p>If researchers were wanting to make smarter mice, there's more to it than that.  They'd first have to figure out how the human brain is made, what patterning differences exist, would have to change the mice, and wouldn't use human neurons.  Again, there's not much special about them, it's the organization.</p><p>The line here is when they start making brains that look human like in mice.  And those would be so big as to crush the mice, so I'm not really worried about that.</p><p>Anyway, why are we perpetuating this idea that biologists do morally objectionable research for kicks with their own money?  Who is going to fund making a mouse think?  Why would researchers be doing this?  This would be expensive, would require grants, and wouldn't really have a purpose that I could see.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But truly , where is the line ?
What about injecting human brain cells into mice ?
How about into chimps ?
The differences between mouse , chimp , and human neurons are less significant than the higher organization of neurons .
I could n't find figures for numbers of neurons in chimps or mice , but this website [ washington.edu ] indicates that humans have around a hundred billion neurons in the brain , the human brain weighing 1.3-1.4kg .
The chimp brain weighs 420 grams .
We have more cells in our brains than mice do in their entire body.Injecting human neurons into a mouse ?
Would n't do anything like make the mouse self aware .
It would most likely cause seizures in the mouse .
I have no moral objections to it , as long as it was done with a clear research goal .
Otherwise , it 's probably my tax dollars at work , and those immunocompromised mice they 'd be using are expensive to maintain.If researchers were wanting to make smarter mice , there 's more to it than that .
They 'd first have to figure out how the human brain is made , what patterning differences exist , would have to change the mice , and would n't use human neurons .
Again , there 's not much special about them , it 's the organization.The line here is when they start making brains that look human like in mice .
And those would be so big as to crush the mice , so I 'm not really worried about that.Anyway , why are we perpetuating this idea that biologists do morally objectionable research for kicks with their own money ?
Who is going to fund making a mouse think ?
Why would researchers be doing this ?
This would be expensive , would require grants , and would n't really have a purpose that I could see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But truly, where is the line?
What about injecting human brain cells into mice?
How about into chimps?
The differences between mouse, chimp, and human neurons are less significant than the higher organization of neurons.
I couldn't find figures for numbers of neurons in chimps or mice, but this website [washington.edu] indicates that humans have around a hundred billion neurons in the brain, the human brain weighing 1.3-1.4kg.
The chimp brain weighs 420 grams.
We have more cells in our brains than mice do in their entire body.Injecting human neurons into a mouse?
Wouldn't do anything like make the mouse self aware.
It would most likely cause seizures in the mouse.
I have no moral objections to it, as long as it was done with a clear research goal.
Otherwise, it's probably my tax dollars at work, and those immunocompromised mice they'd be using are expensive to maintain.If researchers were wanting to make smarter mice, there's more to it than that.
They'd first have to figure out how the human brain is made, what patterning differences exist, would have to change the mice, and wouldn't use human neurons.
Again, there's not much special about them, it's the organization.The line here is when they start making brains that look human like in mice.
And those would be so big as to crush the mice, so I'm not really worried about that.Anyway, why are we perpetuating this idea that biologists do morally objectionable research for kicks with their own money?
Who is going to fund making a mouse think?
Why would researchers be doing this?
This would be expensive, would require grants, and wouldn't really have a purpose that I could see.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148061</id>
	<title>If we could talk to the animals you mean?</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1243677120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, let's see... I can totally see PETA trying to get animals to talk.  I imagine them infiltrating "cloned beef" labs to somehow manipulate the genes to enable talking cows or some such making them say "don't eat me!"  Or, similar actions by Chick-fil-A getting them to say "eat mor chiken!"</p><p>I can see where this sort of tinkering could upset a few people.  After all, we are talking about learning how humans work by duplicating it in other species of animals thus confirming more and more that we are in fact animals of the natural sort and not merely "God's favorites created in his own image."  Some people will never accept it, I know... but they are the same people who somehow manage to justify stepping around the "thou shalt not kill" commandment when the question of the death penalty or war come about.  Oh yes, God's word is ABSOLUTE except when it gets in the way of justice or politics... which bring about something else.</p><p>People are less afraid of pissing off God than they are of upsetting nature's balance which I find refreshing in a way.  While some may argue that they are one in the same, most people see a difference between the two and re/act accordingly.  This says to me that people take the God myth less and less seriously and will one day yet get relegated to the same as Greek, Roman and other mythologies that were once religion.</p><p>If one day, we could elevate another species to the level of human, then we won't be alone in the world.  If one day, we could create a new species that is more capable of surviving life in space, then we won't be alone in the universe.  There is a lot to be careful of when tinkering this way, but there are many important and useful things we could never do without this kind of research.  How many people died when trying to develop flight technology?  LOTS I imagine.  And I have to say it was worth it.  And how many died and continue to die while we continue to advance in space?  The further we go, the more risks there will be.  It was risky to come down from the trees, but we did and eventually, we tamed the planet's predators... mostly.  There WILL be reward for the risks we take.  Could we somehow end up on "The Planet of the Apes?"  Yeah... maybe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , let 's see... I can totally see PETA trying to get animals to talk .
I imagine them infiltrating " cloned beef " labs to somehow manipulate the genes to enable talking cows or some such making them say " do n't eat me !
" Or , similar actions by Chick-fil-A getting them to say " eat mor chiken !
" I can see where this sort of tinkering could upset a few people .
After all , we are talking about learning how humans work by duplicating it in other species of animals thus confirming more and more that we are in fact animals of the natural sort and not merely " God 's favorites created in his own image .
" Some people will never accept it , I know... but they are the same people who somehow manage to justify stepping around the " thou shalt not kill " commandment when the question of the death penalty or war come about .
Oh yes , God 's word is ABSOLUTE except when it gets in the way of justice or politics... which bring about something else.People are less afraid of pissing off God than they are of upsetting nature 's balance which I find refreshing in a way .
While some may argue that they are one in the same , most people see a difference between the two and re/act accordingly .
This says to me that people take the God myth less and less seriously and will one day yet get relegated to the same as Greek , Roman and other mythologies that were once religion.If one day , we could elevate another species to the level of human , then we wo n't be alone in the world .
If one day , we could create a new species that is more capable of surviving life in space , then we wo n't be alone in the universe .
There is a lot to be careful of when tinkering this way , but there are many important and useful things we could never do without this kind of research .
How many people died when trying to develop flight technology ?
LOTS I imagine .
And I have to say it was worth it .
And how many died and continue to die while we continue to advance in space ?
The further we go , the more risks there will be .
It was risky to come down from the trees , but we did and eventually , we tamed the planet 's predators... mostly. There WILL be reward for the risks we take .
Could we somehow end up on " The Planet of the Apes ?
" Yeah... maybe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, let's see... I can totally see PETA trying to get animals to talk.
I imagine them infiltrating "cloned beef" labs to somehow manipulate the genes to enable talking cows or some such making them say "don't eat me!
"  Or, similar actions by Chick-fil-A getting them to say "eat mor chiken!
"I can see where this sort of tinkering could upset a few people.
After all, we are talking about learning how humans work by duplicating it in other species of animals thus confirming more and more that we are in fact animals of the natural sort and not merely "God's favorites created in his own image.
"  Some people will never accept it, I know... but they are the same people who somehow manage to justify stepping around the "thou shalt not kill" commandment when the question of the death penalty or war come about.
Oh yes, God's word is ABSOLUTE except when it gets in the way of justice or politics... which bring about something else.People are less afraid of pissing off God than they are of upsetting nature's balance which I find refreshing in a way.
While some may argue that they are one in the same, most people see a difference between the two and re/act accordingly.
This says to me that people take the God myth less and less seriously and will one day yet get relegated to the same as Greek, Roman and other mythologies that were once religion.If one day, we could elevate another species to the level of human, then we won't be alone in the world.
If one day, we could create a new species that is more capable of surviving life in space, then we won't be alone in the universe.
There is a lot to be careful of when tinkering this way, but there are many important and useful things we could never do without this kind of research.
How many people died when trying to develop flight technology?
LOTS I imagine.
And I have to say it was worth it.
And how many died and continue to die while we continue to advance in space?
The further we go, the more risks there will be.
It was risky to come down from the trees, but we did and eventually, we tamed the planet's predators... mostly.  There WILL be reward for the risks we take.
Could we somehow end up on "The Planet of the Apes?
"  Yeah... maybe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147611</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243626300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just the beginning. They started off with a cut down version of the gene (due to patent restrictions on the method used in working with the full gene) that only allows the mice to squeek in the lower tone, do the high pitch whistle, and make one other noise, such as checking its email. The three squeek limit will be a limitation until the Mice Generation 7, when they'll be able to have as many squeeks as they like, but the amount of memory they can use will be limited. This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them, and they will be born without an ability to browse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just the beginning .
They started off with a cut down version of the gene ( due to patent restrictions on the method used in working with the full gene ) that only allows the mice to squeek in the lower tone , do the high pitch whistle , and make one other noise , such as checking its email .
The three squeek limit will be a limitation until the Mice Generation 7 , when they 'll be able to have as many squeeks as they like , but the amount of memory they can use will be limited .
This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them , and they will be born without an ability to browse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just the beginning.
They started off with a cut down version of the gene (due to patent restrictions on the method used in working with the full gene) that only allows the mice to squeek in the lower tone, do the high pitch whistle, and make one other noise, such as checking its email.
The three squeek limit will be a limitation until the Mice Generation 7, when they'll be able to have as many squeeks as they like, but the amount of memory they can use will be limited.
This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them, and they will be born without an ability to browse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28152301</id>
	<title>This is not right.</title>
	<author>VulpesFoxnik</author>
	<datestamp>1243677720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We should not be putting our inferior genes into the most intelligent animals on earth--that's right the mice.

I mean, after all we are only the third smartest animal on the planet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We should not be putting our inferior genes into the most intelligent animals on earth--that 's right the mice .
I mean , after all we are only the third smartest animal on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We should not be putting our inferior genes into the most intelligent animals on earth--that's right the mice.
I mean, after all we are only the third smartest animal on the planet.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147739</id>
	<title>Uh-oh, here comes the boss...</title>
	<author>billybob\_jcv</author>
	<datestamp>1243714860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"You don't...F***ing...Talk to me...Like that!"<br><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cZwC0jfN1g" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cZwC0jfN1g</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" You do n't...F * * * ing...Talk to me...Like that !
" http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 4cZwC0jfN1g [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"You don't...F***ing...Talk to me...Like that!
"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cZwC0jfN1g [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148639</id>
	<title>Hmmm, fascinating...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243689240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... I wonder if we can replace some scientist gene, too, so that s/he ends up developing a fscking brain!</p><p>What a stupid idea!</p><p>I seem to recall a movie with Charlton Heston. 8-/</p><p>Reality \_is\_ harsher than fiction, it turns out...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I wonder if we can replace some scientist gene , too , so that s/he ends up developing a fscking brain ! What a stupid idea ! I seem to recall a movie with Charlton Heston .
8-/Reality \ _is \ _ harsher than fiction , it turns out.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I wonder if we can replace some scientist gene, too, so that s/he ends up developing a fscking brain!What a stupid idea!I seem to recall a movie with Charlton Heston.
8-/Reality \_is\_ harsher than fiction, it turns out...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28151027</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243712880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do have a problem: where did they get the human genes to do this evil (and pointless) experiment?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do have a problem : where did they get the human genes to do this evil ( and pointless ) experiment ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do have a problem: where did they get the human genes to do this evil (and pointless) experiment?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149595</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243700880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure we can really trust Patterson's results, though, given that he's deliberately misinterpreted sign language in order to get female employees to show their breasts to him.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure we can really trust Patterson 's results , though , given that he 's deliberately misinterpreted sign language in order to get female employees to show their breasts to him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure we can really trust Patterson's results, though, given that he's deliberately misinterpreted sign language in order to get female employees to show their breasts to him.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148605</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243688460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>A new level of slavery can be developed. Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work. If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it!</i>

<p>What? No they wouldn't. Why go to all the trouble of genetically engineering a subhuman slave race when you've already got millions of untermenschen all over the place that you need to find a use for? The whole point of the Third Reich was to get <i>rid</i> of the inferior breeds, not to create more!

</p><p>Mengele would probably have played with this technology, but as a matter of policy the Nazis were fixated on genetic purity. Cross-species gene tampering of this kind would probably have disgusted them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A new level of slavery can be developed .
Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work .
If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it !
What ? No they would n't .
Why go to all the trouble of genetically engineering a subhuman slave race when you 've already got millions of untermenschen all over the place that you need to find a use for ?
The whole point of the Third Reich was to get rid of the inferior breeds , not to create more !
Mengele would probably have played with this technology , but as a matter of policy the Nazis were fixated on genetic purity .
Cross-species gene tampering of this kind would probably have disgusted them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A new level of slavery can be developed.
Just imagine a totalitarian state with zombie slaves to do all the dirt work.
If the Nazis had had this technology they would have used it!
What? No they wouldn't.
Why go to all the trouble of genetically engineering a subhuman slave race when you've already got millions of untermenschen all over the place that you need to find a use for?
The whole point of the Third Reich was to get rid of the inferior breeds, not to create more!
Mengele would probably have played with this technology, but as a matter of policy the Nazis were fixated on genetic purity.
Cross-species gene tampering of this kind would probably have disgusted them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148213</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1243681080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think there is a flaw in your reasoning that sanctity of life should be determined by ability of expression. Or do you think that toddlers and the mentally handicap are not worth anything?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think there is a flaw in your reasoning that sanctity of life should be determined by ability of expression .
Or do you think that toddlers and the mentally handicap are not worth anything ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think there is a flaw in your reasoning that sanctity of life should be determined by ability of expression.
Or do you think that toddlers and the mentally handicap are not worth anything?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147727</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148419</id>
	<title>And the first thing the scientists hear is...</title>
	<author>sjmacko29</author>
	<datestamp>1243685100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Here I come to save the day!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Here I come to save the day !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Here I come to save the day!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149749</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1243702020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem is that such a line doesn't exist. The reason why we can neatly call something human or non-human today is that there's not much in terms of middle ground, and we don't have to be "scientific" in our definition of what is human - simple intuition is good enough. But when the day comes that such middle ground is created, we'll be forced to either come up with some arbitrary guidelines for classifying living beings as human/non-human, or to finally acknowledge the truth - at the end of the day, there's no such thing as "human", or even "living being". Unfortunately, the latter isn't really much of an option, since it's hard to imagine a functional society that doesn't believe that people are somehow special (or that people are, period). So I think sooner or later legislators will be forced to start bullshitting their way out of this problem by making up methods of deciding if something is "human enough" to have human rights, etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is that such a line does n't exist .
The reason why we can neatly call something human or non-human today is that there 's not much in terms of middle ground , and we do n't have to be " scientific " in our definition of what is human - simple intuition is good enough .
But when the day comes that such middle ground is created , we 'll be forced to either come up with some arbitrary guidelines for classifying living beings as human/non-human , or to finally acknowledge the truth - at the end of the day , there 's no such thing as " human " , or even " living being " .
Unfortunately , the latter is n't really much of an option , since it 's hard to imagine a functional society that does n't believe that people are somehow special ( or that people are , period ) .
So I think sooner or later legislators will be forced to start bullshitting their way out of this problem by making up methods of deciding if something is " human enough " to have human rights , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is that such a line doesn't exist.
The reason why we can neatly call something human or non-human today is that there's not much in terms of middle ground, and we don't have to be "scientific" in our definition of what is human - simple intuition is good enough.
But when the day comes that such middle ground is created, we'll be forced to either come up with some arbitrary guidelines for classifying living beings as human/non-human, or to finally acknowledge the truth - at the end of the day, there's no such thing as "human", or even "living being".
Unfortunately, the latter isn't really much of an option, since it's hard to imagine a functional society that doesn't believe that people are somehow special (or that people are, period).
So I think sooner or later legislators will be forced to start bullshitting their way out of this problem by making up methods of deciding if something is "human enough" to have human rights, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487</id>
	<title>this can only end..</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1243624440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>... with ultrasonic zombie mice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>... with ultrasonic zombie mice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... with ultrasonic zombie mice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154637</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Thinboy00</author>
	<datestamp>1243694640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[snip]Nazis[snip]</p></div><p>Godwin's law!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ snip ] Nazis [ snip ] Godwin 's law !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[snip]Nazis[snip]Godwin's law!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147855</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>kanweg</author>
	<datestamp>1243716480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them, and they will be born without an ability to browse.'</p><p>I think this would have been more accurate: And they no longer have a browser-pellet forcefed to them, but are made concious that they are free to browse as they like.</p><p>Bert</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them , and they will be born without an ability to browse .
'I think this would have been more accurate : And they no longer have a browser-pellet forcefed to them , but are made concious that they are free to browse as they like.Bert</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"This is of course until the EU gets their hands into them, and they will be born without an ability to browse.
'I think this would have been more accurate: And they no longer have a browser-pellet forcefed to them, but are made concious that they are free to browse as they like.Bert</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147611</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>DynaSoar</author>
	<datestamp>1243676880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What I wouldn't pay for a mouse that could curse.  Or good god a monkey.  Give me a cursing monkey and I'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die.</p></div><p>A marker of language as opposed to verbal signaling is that speech is 'productive'. That is, it evolves. This can be done by compounding -- simplifying multiple elements into a single one. An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson's dissertation. Koko took the signs for 'apple' and 'drink' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice'. This example has been passed around for years as good evidence Koko was actually using language.</p><p>Another example from the same source but not made as public was Koko's compounding 'dirty', 'toilet' and 'stink' into a sign referring to feces. Not terribly surprising in normal use. But she used it in another context. When her intended mate Mike was introduced, Koko didn't care for him at all. One time when Penny was trying to cajole Koko into accepting Mike, she said "Mike is a smart gorilla. I like Mike."  Unimpressed, Koko replied "Mike dirty-toilet-stink", ie. 'Mike is shit'.</p><p>There's your cursing monkey (actually, ape). You can find it in her dissertation, "Linguistic Capabilities of a Lowland Gorilla", Stanford, 1979. Or you can call Koko's humans at 1-800-ME-GO-APE (634-6273), I dirty-toilet-stink you not. If you're serious about your paycheck to even the slightest degree, feel free to visit koko.org and donate to her Conservation Education Project: Koko is teaching sign language in Cameroon, to deaf children as well as to hearing children interested in becoming sign language interpreters. If anyone still doubts Koko's linguistic abilities in light of this fact, I would doubt their linguistic comprehension more than I would Koko's.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What I would n't pay for a mouse that could curse .
Or good god a monkey .
Give me a cursing monkey and I 'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die.A marker of language as opposed to verbal signaling is that speech is 'productive' .
That is , it evolves .
This can be done by compounding -- simplifying multiple elements into a single one .
An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson 's dissertation .
Koko took the signs for 'apple ' and 'drink ' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice' .
This example has been passed around for years as good evidence Koko was actually using language.Another example from the same source but not made as public was Koko 's compounding 'dirty ' , 'toilet ' and 'stink ' into a sign referring to feces .
Not terribly surprising in normal use .
But she used it in another context .
When her intended mate Mike was introduced , Koko did n't care for him at all .
One time when Penny was trying to cajole Koko into accepting Mike , she said " Mike is a smart gorilla .
I like Mike .
" Unimpressed , Koko replied " Mike dirty-toilet-stink " , ie .
'Mike is shit'.There 's your cursing monkey ( actually , ape ) .
You can find it in her dissertation , " Linguistic Capabilities of a Lowland Gorilla " , Stanford , 1979 .
Or you can call Koko 's humans at 1-800-ME-GO-APE ( 634-6273 ) , I dirty-toilet-stink you not .
If you 're serious about your paycheck to even the slightest degree , feel free to visit koko.org and donate to her Conservation Education Project : Koko is teaching sign language in Cameroon , to deaf children as well as to hearing children interested in becoming sign language interpreters .
If anyone still doubts Koko 's linguistic abilities in light of this fact , I would doubt their linguistic comprehension more than I would Koko 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I wouldn't pay for a mouse that could curse.
Or good god a monkey.
Give me a cursing monkey and I'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die.A marker of language as opposed to verbal signaling is that speech is 'productive'.
That is, it evolves.
This can be done by compounding -- simplifying multiple elements into a single one.
An example of Koko the gorilla doing comes from Penny Patterson's dissertation.
Koko took the signs for 'apple' and 'drink' and formed a single compound sign for 'apple juice'.
This example has been passed around for years as good evidence Koko was actually using language.Another example from the same source but not made as public was Koko's compounding 'dirty', 'toilet' and 'stink' into a sign referring to feces.
Not terribly surprising in normal use.
But she used it in another context.
When her intended mate Mike was introduced, Koko didn't care for him at all.
One time when Penny was trying to cajole Koko into accepting Mike, she said "Mike is a smart gorilla.
I like Mike.
"  Unimpressed, Koko replied "Mike dirty-toilet-stink", ie.
'Mike is shit'.There's your cursing monkey (actually, ape).
You can find it in her dissertation, "Linguistic Capabilities of a Lowland Gorilla", Stanford, 1979.
Or you can call Koko's humans at 1-800-ME-GO-APE (634-6273), I dirty-toilet-stink you not.
If you're serious about your paycheck to even the slightest degree, feel free to visit koko.org and donate to her Conservation Education Project: Koko is teaching sign language in Cameroon, to deaf children as well as to hearing children interested in becoming sign language interpreters.
If anyone still doubts Koko's linguistic abilities in light of this fact, I would doubt their linguistic comprehension more than I would Koko's.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148793</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243691880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As soon as the mice start dropping f-bombs I think it's time to quit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as the mice start dropping f-bombs I think it 's time to quit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as the mice start dropping f-bombs I think it's time to quit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154259</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243690980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's great to see a poet in Slashdot. All the comments we read are usually stupid, but yours is a great example of a literary piece of gold. How were you able to came up with such a nice story while posting? I bet you must be a poet IRL. So much I liked it that I saved it on my computer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's great to see a poet in Slashdot .
All the comments we read are usually stupid , but yours is a great example of a literary piece of gold .
How were you able to came up with such a nice story while posting ?
I bet you must be a poet IRL .
So much I liked it that I saved it on my computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's great to see a poet in Slashdot.
All the comments we read are usually stupid, but yours is a great example of a literary piece of gold.
How were you able to came up with such a nice story while posting?
I bet you must be a poet IRL.
So much I liked it that I saved it on my computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147517</id>
	<title>And their mother says...</title>
	<author>techno-vampire</author>
	<datestamp>1243624740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Squeak to me, baby, squeak to me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Squeak to me , baby , squeak to me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Squeak to me, baby, squeak to me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</id>
	<title>Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>Talisman</author>
	<datestamp>1243716060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the more interesting aspects of basal ganglia is that it, along with the thalamus, make up the limbic system.  Located below the cerebral cortex, this is the area of the brain where base emotions are generated, such as aggression and impulse.

<br> <br>

While researching speech in relation to the brain, it was discovered that while regular, everyday speech originated from the pars opercularis and pars triangularis of the inferior frontal gyrus, cursing originated from the basal ganglia.

<br> <br>

We know intuitively that cursing 'feels' different than regular speech when you do it, at an emotional level.  They have proven that it actually <i>is</i> different, at the biological level.

<br> <br>

What's supercool about this experiment, is they increased the mouse's capacity to <b> <i>curse</i> </b>.

<br> <br>

What I wouldn't pay for a mouse that could curse.  Or good god a monkey.  Give me a cursing monkey and I'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the more interesting aspects of basal ganglia is that it , along with the thalamus , make up the limbic system .
Located below the cerebral cortex , this is the area of the brain where base emotions are generated , such as aggression and impulse .
While researching speech in relation to the brain , it was discovered that while regular , everyday speech originated from the pars opercularis and pars triangularis of the inferior frontal gyrus , cursing originated from the basal ganglia .
We know intuitively that cursing 'feels ' different than regular speech when you do it , at an emotional level .
They have proven that it actually is different , at the biological level .
What 's supercool about this experiment , is they increased the mouse 's capacity to curse .
What I would n't pay for a mouse that could curse .
Or good god a monkey .
Give me a cursing monkey and I 'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the more interesting aspects of basal ganglia is that it, along with the thalamus, make up the limbic system.
Located below the cerebral cortex, this is the area of the brain where base emotions are generated, such as aggression and impulse.
While researching speech in relation to the brain, it was discovered that while regular, everyday speech originated from the pars opercularis and pars triangularis of the inferior frontal gyrus, cursing originated from the basal ganglia.
We know intuitively that cursing 'feels' different than regular speech when you do it, at an emotional level.
They have proven that it actually is different, at the biological level.
What's supercool about this experiment, is they increased the mouse's capacity to  curse .
What I wouldn't pay for a mouse that could curse.
Or good god a monkey.
Give me a cursing monkey and I'll tithe you every paycheck 'til I die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28151395</id>
	<title>DTMF</title>
	<author>PhasmatisApparatus</author>
	<datestamp>1243715160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thanks a LOT guys. Now I'll have even MORE trouble explaining to the Average Joe the difference between a computer mouse and a dialup modem, what with the dual-tone mice scurrying around!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thanks a LOT guys .
Now I 'll have even MORE trouble explaining to the Average Joe the difference between a computer mouse and a dialup modem , what with the dual-tone mice scurrying around !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thanks a LOT guys.
Now I'll have even MORE trouble explaining to the Average Joe the difference between a computer mouse and a dialup modem, what with the dual-tone mice scurrying around!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147601</id>
	<title>Re:Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243626120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hear the rats of Nicad were pretty dense. <p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/me ducks</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear the rats of Nicad were pretty dense .
/me ducks</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear the rats of Nicad were pretty dense.
/me ducks</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148895</id>
	<title>Re:The Ethics of Sentient Life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243693440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When we create chimera, we are playing god.</p></div><p>I'm sick and tired of people saying that, especially the people who say that like it's an inherently bad thing. I seriously don't get what's wrong with it. If "playing god" can improve the quality of human life, I'd say it's immoral <em>not to</em>.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When we create chimera , we are playing god.I 'm sick and tired of people saying that , especially the people who say that like it 's an inherently bad thing .
I seriously do n't get what 's wrong with it .
If " playing god " can improve the quality of human life , I 'd say it 's immoral not to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When we create chimera, we are playing god.I'm sick and tired of people saying that, especially the people who say that like it's an inherently bad thing.
I seriously don't get what's wrong with it.
If "playing god" can improve the quality of human life, I'd say it's immoral not to.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147933</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>SlashWombat</author>
	<datestamp>1243674540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why didn't you put in the bit about mice being the most intelligent creatures on earth, followed by the dolphins.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why did n't you put in the bit about mice being the most intelligent creatures on earth , followed by the dolphins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why didn't you put in the bit about mice being the most intelligent creatures on earth, followed by the dolphins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149243</id>
	<title>ObPython</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243697460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <b>Ewing:</b> Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you. Ladies
        and gentlemen. I have in this box twenty-three white mice. Mice which
        have been painstakingly trained over the past few years, to squeak at
        a selected pitch. <i>(he raises a mouse by its tail)</i> This is E sharp...
        and this one is G. You get the general idea. Now these mice are so arranged
        upon this rack, that when played in the correct order they will squeak
        'The Bells of St Mary's'. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you on the mouse
        organ 'The Bells of St Mary's'. Thank you. </p><p> <i>(He produces two mallets. He starts stritu'ng the mice while singing
        quietly 'The Bells of St Mary's. Each downward stroke of the mallet
        brings a terrible squashing sound and the expiring squeak. It is quite
        clear that he is slaughtering the mice. The musical effect is poor.
        After thefirst few notes people are shouting 'Stop it, stop him someone,
        Oh my God'. He cheerfully takes a bow. He is hauled off by the floor
        manager. He comes back and has a few more 'hits' before being dragged
        off again.)</i> </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ewing : Thank you , thank you , thank you , thank you .
Ladies and gentlemen .
I have in this box twenty-three white mice .
Mice which have been painstakingly trained over the past few years , to squeak at a selected pitch .
( he raises a mouse by its tail ) This is E sharp.. . and this one is G. You get the general idea .
Now these mice are so arranged upon this rack , that when played in the correct order they will squeak 'The Bells of St Mary 's' .
Ladies and gentlemen , I give you on the mouse organ 'The Bells of St Mary 's' .
Thank you .
( He produces two mallets .
He starts stritu'ng the mice while singing quietly 'The Bells of St Mary 's .
Each downward stroke of the mallet brings a terrible squashing sound and the expiring squeak .
It is quite clear that he is slaughtering the mice .
The musical effect is poor .
After thefirst few notes people are shouting 'Stop it , stop him someone , Oh my God' .
He cheerfully takes a bow .
He is hauled off by the floor manager .
He comes back and has a few more 'hits ' before being dragged off again .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Ewing: Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.
Ladies
        and gentlemen.
I have in this box twenty-three white mice.
Mice which
        have been painstakingly trained over the past few years, to squeak at
        a selected pitch.
(he raises a mouse by its tail) This is E sharp...
        and this one is G. You get the general idea.
Now these mice are so arranged
        upon this rack, that when played in the correct order they will squeak
        'The Bells of St Mary's'.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you on the mouse
        organ 'The Bells of St Mary's'.
Thank you.
(He produces two mallets.
He starts stritu'ng the mice while singing
        quietly 'The Bells of St Mary's.
Each downward stroke of the mallet
        brings a terrible squashing sound and the expiring squeak.
It is quite
        clear that he is slaughtering the mice.
The musical effect is poor.
After thefirst few notes people are shouting 'Stop it, stop him someone,
        Oh my God'.
He cheerfully takes a bow.
He is hauled off by the floor
        manager.
He comes back and has a few more 'hits' before being dragged
        off again.
) </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</id>
	<title>Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>DamienNightbane</author>
	<datestamp>1243624860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is how The Secret of Nimh began, isn't it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is how The Secret of Nimh began , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is how The Secret of Nimh began, isn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147501</id>
	<title>Massive reverse engineering job</title>
	<author>QuantumG</author>
	<datestamp>1243624560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Today's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millenniums.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Today 's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millenniums .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today's biology is finite component analysis done at a massive scale.. Figuring out how a machine as big as a person works is going to take millenniums.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149923</id>
	<title>One serious implication</title>
	<author>Burnova</author>
	<datestamp>1243703280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We can rewrite Flowers for Algernon and let the mouse be the one who gets smart.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We can rewrite Flowers for Algernon and let the mouse be the one who gets smart .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can rewrite Flowers for Algernon and let the mouse be the one who gets smart.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147989</id>
	<title>Heard:</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1243675620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Okay, who moved my fuckin' cheese! Hey Mr. Labcoat, why don't YOU run this goddam maze; you look like you could lose some weight."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Okay , who moved my fuckin ' cheese !
Hey Mr. Labcoat , why do n't YOU run this goddam maze ; you look like you could lose some weight .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Okay, who moved my fuckin' cheese!
Hey Mr. Labcoat, why don't YOU run this goddam maze; you look like you could lose some weight.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148219</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>amRadioHed</author>
	<datestamp>1243681200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What possible reason would you have for wanting to avoid knowing this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What possible reason would you have for wanting to avoid knowing this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What possible reason would you have for wanting to avoid knowing this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148059</id>
	<title>we can't let supermice get out into the wild</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243677120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>too many scientists are careless, we can't let supermice get out into the wild, we need goverment oversight -- squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak (all your base are belong to mice)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>too many scientists are careless , we ca n't let supermice get out into the wild , we need goverment oversight -- squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak ( all your base are belong to mice )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>too many scientists are careless, we can't let supermice get out into the wild, we need goverment oversight -- squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak squeak (all your base are belong to mice)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149713</id>
	<title>NIMH?</title>
	<author>elblanco</author>
	<datestamp>1243701780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great, the mice of NIMH will be escaping to the rose bush in 3...2...1...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great , the mice of NIMH will be escaping to the rose bush in 3...2...1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great, the mice of NIMH will be escaping to the rose bush in 3...2...1...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148835</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1243692420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>i'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animal</p></div></blockquote><p>Brilliant.  So if the experiment isn't intrinsically painful you can just hit them with a big stick.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animalBrilliant .
So if the experiment is n't intrinsically painful you can just hit them with a big stick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animalBrilliant.
So if the experiment isn't intrinsically painful you can just hit them with a big stick.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28161931</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>canadian\_right</author>
	<datestamp>1243771200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Putting human genes in a pig doesn't make it any more human than it is now. You do realize that ANY mammal already shares a huge amount of genetic code with us? It isn't some kind of magic "humaness" in our flesh that makes us human. It is the fact that we are self-aware, thinking animals that makes us human. If ET's came down tomorrow from some far star I would consider them "human" even if they share zero genes with us.
</p><p>
Yes, if it can be done, and it doesn't hurt humans then yes, we should give it a try. Especially if we think there is a chance it will do some good, like cure disease. Trying to stop genetic engineering would be like our far off ancestors trying to stop research into fire starting because it isn't natural. Tending a fire you got from a lightning strike is the only natural way!
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Putting human genes in a pig does n't make it any more human than it is now .
You do realize that ANY mammal already shares a huge amount of genetic code with us ?
It is n't some kind of magic " humaness " in our flesh that makes us human .
It is the fact that we are self-aware , thinking animals that makes us human .
If ET 's came down tomorrow from some far star I would consider them " human " even if they share zero genes with us .
Yes , if it can be done , and it does n't hurt humans then yes , we should give it a try .
Especially if we think there is a chance it will do some good , like cure disease .
Trying to stop genetic engineering would be like our far off ancestors trying to stop research into fire starting because it is n't natural .
Tending a fire you got from a lightning strike is the only natural way !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Putting human genes in a pig doesn't make it any more human than it is now.
You do realize that ANY mammal already shares a huge amount of genetic code with us?
It isn't some kind of magic "humaness" in our flesh that makes us human.
It is the fact that we are self-aware, thinking animals that makes us human.
If ET's came down tomorrow from some far star I would consider them "human" even if they share zero genes with us.
Yes, if it can be done, and it doesn't hurt humans then yes, we should give it a try.
Especially if we think there is a chance it will do some good, like cure disease.
Trying to stop genetic engineering would be like our far off ancestors trying to stop research into fire starting because it isn't natural.
Tending a fire you got from a lightning strike is the only natural way!
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147567</id>
	<title>Do the monkey next</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This doesn't really tell much besides what was already expected. If the same thing was done to an ape/monkey capable of being taught sign language, now that would give some real answers. But instead of just doing it they are going to quibble about it for years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This does n't really tell much besides what was already expected .
If the same thing was done to an ape/monkey capable of being taught sign language , now that would give some real answers .
But instead of just doing it they are going to quibble about it for years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This doesn't really tell much besides what was already expected.
If the same thing was done to an ape/monkey capable of being taught sign language, now that would give some real answers.
But instead of just doing it they are going to quibble about it for years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150625</id>
	<title>Re:Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1243709100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt;This is how The Secret of Nimh began, isn't it?</p><p>I don't recall the mice whistling to each other in ultrasonic morse code, but then again, it's been a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; This is how The Secret of Nimh began , is n't it ? I do n't recall the mice whistling to each other in ultrasonic morse code , but then again , it 's been a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt;This is how The Secret of Nimh began, isn't it?I don't recall the mice whistling to each other in ultrasonic morse code, but then again, it's been a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149647</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1243701120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.</p></div><p>So what? Human societies (of which there are many) still on occasional can't come to grips with basic human behavior which has been around for longer than humanity has.<br> <br>

It seems to me that society has some obligation to keep up to speed on what's going on in technology, science, and the forefront of human advancement. What good are uninformed regulations? My view is that there's some flawed game theory here. That is, proponents of "banning" certain technological advancements think it's merely a choice between banning a technology versus allowing the technology (along with any new harms introduced by the new technology). However, this ignores that other less squeamish societies will continue to advance in these areas. What is more likely is that the technology will be developed anyway, but the more Luddite society will receive less of the benefit and more of the harm. I especially don't appreciate it when someone tries to aggravate a problem (for recent examples, see global warming via the banning of nuclear power plants or the war on terrorism) in order to gain power or implement their own social experiment.<br> <br>

Finally, my view is that the code of laws and rules that underlie society are reactive. Society just doesn't do entirely new issues very well. We need examples first in order to make relatively good decisions.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments shouldn't be done on humans.</p></div><p>And most of us would like to live in a world where certain other experiments should be and are performed on humans.<br> <br>

As I see it, uninformed morality is equivalent to no morality. There are benefits and drawbacks to any new technology. If you don't know what those benefits and drawbacks are, then you can't make a rational decision about the technology.<br> <br>

Having said that, your general concern about creating "human-like" animals seems reasonable. As I see it, certain cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) and primates (the great apes) are probably already sufficiently intelligent (even though that intelligence might not be similar to human intelligence) that we should grant them many of the rights we grant humans (in particular, to not be food animals). I just don't think it is that relevant or useful to base your argument on how unprepared society will be for such changes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.So what ?
Human societies ( of which there are many ) still on occasional ca n't come to grips with basic human behavior which has been around for longer than humanity has .
It seems to me that society has some obligation to keep up to speed on what 's going on in technology , science , and the forefront of human advancement .
What good are uninformed regulations ?
My view is that there 's some flawed game theory here .
That is , proponents of " banning " certain technological advancements think it 's merely a choice between banning a technology versus allowing the technology ( along with any new harms introduced by the new technology ) .
However , this ignores that other less squeamish societies will continue to advance in these areas .
What is more likely is that the technology will be developed anyway , but the more Luddite society will receive less of the benefit and more of the harm .
I especially do n't appreciate it when someone tries to aggravate a problem ( for recent examples , see global warming via the banning of nuclear power plants or the war on terrorism ) in order to gain power or implement their own social experiment .
Finally , my view is that the code of laws and rules that underlie society are reactive .
Society just does n't do entirely new issues very well .
We need examples first in order to make relatively good decisions.And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments should n't be done on humans.And most of us would like to live in a world where certain other experiments should be and are performed on humans .
As I see it , uninformed morality is equivalent to no morality .
There are benefits and drawbacks to any new technology .
If you do n't know what those benefits and drawbacks are , then you ca n't make a rational decision about the technology .
Having said that , your general concern about creating " human-like " animals seems reasonable .
As I see it , certain cetaceans ( whales , dolphins , and porpoises ) and primates ( the great apes ) are probably already sufficiently intelligent ( even though that intelligence might not be similar to human intelligence ) that we should grant them many of the rights we grant humans ( in particular , to not be food animals ) .
I just do n't think it is that relevant or useful to base your argument on how unprepared society will be for such changes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.So what?
Human societies (of which there are many) still on occasional can't come to grips with basic human behavior which has been around for longer than humanity has.
It seems to me that society has some obligation to keep up to speed on what's going on in technology, science, and the forefront of human advancement.
What good are uninformed regulations?
My view is that there's some flawed game theory here.
That is, proponents of "banning" certain technological advancements think it's merely a choice between banning a technology versus allowing the technology (along with any new harms introduced by the new technology).
However, this ignores that other less squeamish societies will continue to advance in these areas.
What is more likely is that the technology will be developed anyway, but the more Luddite society will receive less of the benefit and more of the harm.
I especially don't appreciate it when someone tries to aggravate a problem (for recent examples, see global warming via the banning of nuclear power plants or the war on terrorism) in order to gain power or implement their own social experiment.
Finally, my view is that the code of laws and rules that underlie society are reactive.
Society just doesn't do entirely new issues very well.
We need examples first in order to make relatively good decisions.And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments shouldn't be done on humans.And most of us would like to live in a world where certain other experiments should be and are performed on humans.
As I see it, uninformed morality is equivalent to no morality.
There are benefits and drawbacks to any new technology.
If you don't know what those benefits and drawbacks are, then you can't make a rational decision about the technology.
Having said that, your general concern about creating "human-like" animals seems reasonable.
As I see it, certain cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) and primates (the great apes) are probably already sufficiently intelligent (even though that intelligence might not be similar to human intelligence) that we should grant them many of the rights we grant humans (in particular, to not be food animals).
I just don't think it is that relevant or useful to base your argument on how unprepared society will be for such changes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28160579</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>drachenstern</author>
	<datestamp>1243803180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, while I'm surprised nobody else has done it yet, I can't pass it up...</p><p>"Soylent Pork, it's what's for dinner"...</p><p>And yes, I do believe I would...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , while I 'm surprised nobody else has done it yet , I ca n't pass it up... " Soylent Pork , it 's what 's for dinner " ...And yes , I do believe I would.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, while I'm surprised nobody else has done it yet, I can't pass it up..."Soylent Pork, it's what's for dinner"...And yes, I do believe I would...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147697</id>
	<title>The Ethics of Sentient Life</title>
	<author>reporter</author>
	<datestamp>1243714380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>If the human gene of speech is what gives us sentience, then we should ponder the ethics of sticking the gene into any mammal.
<p>
Suppose that this mouse is actually now sentient.  Do we commit a crime when we imprison it in a laboratory or mangle its body (for the sake of some test)?
</p><p>
When we create chimera, we are playing god.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the human gene of speech is what gives us sentience , then we should ponder the ethics of sticking the gene into any mammal .
Suppose that this mouse is actually now sentient .
Do we commit a crime when we imprison it in a laboratory or mangle its body ( for the sake of some test ) ?
When we create chimera , we are playing god .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the human gene of speech is what gives us sentience, then we should ponder the ethics of sticking the gene into any mammal.
Suppose that this mouse is actually now sentient.
Do we commit a crime when we imprison it in a laboratory or mangle its body (for the sake of some test)?
When we create chimera, we are playing god.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>timmarhy</author>
	<datestamp>1243713960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>the classic one anti GM nut jobs bring up is "would you eat pork with human genes in it", and i guess there will be similar objections raised over this. they try to imply it would make you a cannibal and other nonsense, ignoring the fact we already share genetic code with pigs. <p>
in a nut shell, i'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animal. call me a soft lefty, but i just can't stomach unwarranted suffering of animals. i feel worse for them than i do for most humans, because they don't understand what's happening and certainly don't bring it on themselfs.</p><p>
once i was asked if i supported harvesting organs from animals to save people - I do, but only if it's done in a humane manner and the animals don't suffer. after all if we can't protect animals from cruelty what chance is there we will do the same for our fellow man?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the classic one anti GM nut jobs bring up is " would you eat pork with human genes in it " , and i guess there will be similar objections raised over this .
they try to imply it would make you a cannibal and other nonsense , ignoring the fact we already share genetic code with pigs .
in a nut shell , i 'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animal .
call me a soft lefty , but i just ca n't stomach unwarranted suffering of animals .
i feel worse for them than i do for most humans , because they do n't understand what 's happening and certainly do n't bring it on themselfs .
once i was asked if i supported harvesting organs from animals to save people - I do , but only if it 's done in a humane manner and the animals do n't suffer .
after all if we ca n't protect animals from cruelty what chance is there we will do the same for our fellow man ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the classic one anti GM nut jobs bring up is "would you eat pork with human genes in it", and i guess there will be similar objections raised over this.
they try to imply it would make you a cannibal and other nonsense, ignoring the fact we already share genetic code with pigs.
in a nut shell, i'd support any form of genetic experiementation that does cause undue distress or suffering on an animal.
call me a soft lefty, but i just can't stomach unwarranted suffering of animals.
i feel worse for them than i do for most humans, because they don't understand what's happening and certainly don't bring it on themselfs.
once i was asked if i supported harvesting organs from animals to save people - I do, but only if it's done in a humane manner and the animals don't suffer.
after all if we can't protect animals from cruelty what chance is there we will do the same for our fellow man?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149259</id>
	<title>Re:Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1243697640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is just our plan for the continuation of at least <em>some</em> of our genes when we render the planet incapable of sustaining human life. We'll also engineer the mice for CO2 resistance, and they can live on the cockroaches that will be the only other thing around.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just our plan for the continuation of at least some of our genes when we render the planet incapable of sustaining human life .
We 'll also engineer the mice for CO2 resistance , and they can live on the cockroaches that will be the only other thing around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just our plan for the continuation of at least some of our genes when we render the planet incapable of sustaining human life.
We'll also engineer the mice for CO2 resistance, and they can live on the cockroaches that will be the only other thing around.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149521</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243700040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, it's all a joke. All a joke to the sociopaths who inhabit Slashdot, totally incapable of feeling the suffering of others. That would make you emotionally retarded, stuck in the emotional state of a 6 month old baby, how proud you must be!</p><p>Oh look, a sociopath whose own mother didn't love him or hold him enough when he was a baby, and confined him to a cot in a separate bedroom so he would cry himself to sleep, decides to torture innocent baby mice to subconsciously try to show the world what happened to HIM when HE was a baby:</p><p>"Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers. The humanized baby mice, when isolated, made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch, among other differences, Dr. Enard says."</p><p>How 'scientific'.</p><p>This is bullshit. Fraud. A waste of money. These nutcases are wasting BILLIONS of dollars every year on this bullshit. They view ALL living creatures as mere TOYS, things to be 'played with', and have not one iota of compassion in their bodies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , it 's all a joke .
All a joke to the sociopaths who inhabit Slashdot , totally incapable of feeling the suffering of others .
That would make you emotionally retarded , stuck in the emotional state of a 6 month old baby , how proud you must be ! Oh look , a sociopath whose own mother did n't love him or hold him enough when he was a baby , and confined him to a cot in a separate bedroom so he would cry himself to sleep , decides to torture innocent baby mice to subconsciously try to show the world what happened to HIM when HE was a baby : " Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers .
The humanized baby mice , when isolated , made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch , among other differences , Dr. Enard says .
" How 'scientific'.This is bullshit .
Fraud. A waste of money .
These nutcases are wasting BILLIONS of dollars every year on this bullshit .
They view ALL living creatures as mere TOYS , things to be 'played with ' , and have not one iota of compassion in their bodies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, it's all a joke.
All a joke to the sociopaths who inhabit Slashdot, totally incapable of feeling the suffering of others.
That would make you emotionally retarded, stuck in the emotional state of a 6 month old baby, how proud you must be!Oh look, a sociopath whose own mother didn't love him or hold him enough when he was a baby, and confined him to a cot in a separate bedroom so he would cry himself to sleep, decides to torture innocent baby mice to subconsciously try to show the world what happened to HIM when HE was a baby:"Baby mice utter ultrasonic whistles when removed from their mothers.
The humanized baby mice, when isolated, made whistles that had a slightly lower pitch, among other differences, Dr. Enard says.
"How 'scientific'.This is bullshit.
Fraud. A waste of money.
These nutcases are wasting BILLIONS of dollars every year on this bullshit.
They view ALL living creatures as mere TOYS, things to be 'played with', and have not one iota of compassion in their bodies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150395</id>
	<title>I for one ...</title>
	<author>Lemming Mark</author>
	<datestamp>1243707120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>eep eep eep!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>eep eep eep !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eep eep eep!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147563</id>
	<title>First spoken humain words...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pinky , are you pondering what I 'm pondering ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147963</id>
	<title>awesome idea</title>
	<author>NovaHorizon</author>
	<datestamp>1243675140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All animal activists need to completely stop this line of research, is 1 mouse to 'accidentally' squeak "Please stop"...
Great idea to give the mice a possible source of communication before testing other things that won't as easily hamper the whole process..</htmltext>
<tokenext>All animal activists need to completely stop this line of research , is 1 mouse to 'accidentally ' squeak " Please stop " .. . Great idea to give the mice a possible source of communication before testing other things that wo n't as easily hamper the whole process. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All animal activists need to completely stop this line of research, is 1 mouse to 'accidentally' squeak "Please stop"...
Great idea to give the mice a possible source of communication before testing other things that won't as easily hamper the whole process..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149301</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243697880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Add the gene that causes Tourette's and I'll go in with you!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add the gene that causes Tourette 's and I 'll go in with you !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add the gene that causes Tourette's and I'll go in with you!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147707</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>LaskoVortex</author>
	<datestamp>1243714440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm assuming most people here won't have a problem with this research. But truly, where is the line?</p></div><p>Soylent Green. The line is at Soylent Green. Be afraid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm assuming most people here wo n't have a problem with this research .
But truly , where is the line ? Soylent Green .
The line is at Soylent Green .
Be afraid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm assuming most people here won't have a problem with this research.
But truly, where is the line?Soylent Green.
The line is at Soylent Green.
Be afraid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149523</id>
	<title>I knew it</title>
	<author>Is0m0rph</author>
	<datestamp>1243700100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ratatouille was based on real events!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ratatouille was based on real events !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ratatouille was based on real events!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148643</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243689240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>RTFS (summary). The ultrasonic sound is ""before"" the gene swap, ergo not funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFS ( summary ) .
The ultrasonic sound is " " before " " the gene swap , ergo not funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFS (summary).
The ultrasonic sound is ""before"" the gene swap, ergo not funny.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150173</id>
	<title>Hmm.</title>
	<author>Nekomusume</author>
	<datestamp>1243705260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps"</p><p>I can think of dozens of feasable ways to explore that. For example, examining chimps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps " I can think of dozens of feasable ways to explore that .
For example , examining chimps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"putting significant human genes into mice is the only feasible way of exploring the essential differences between people and chimps"I can think of dozens of feasable ways to explore that.
For example, examining chimps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150709</id>
	<title>Just don't go injecting brain cells into Britney</title>
	<author>sgt\_doom</author>
	<datestamp>1243709880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think we're safe as long as they refrain from injecting any brain cells into Britney Spears.  Wasn't there a film about this, though?  I think it was called <i>The Mouse That Roared</i>??</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we 're safe as long as they refrain from injecting any brain cells into Britney Spears .
Was n't there a film about this , though ?
I think it was called The Mouse That Roared ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we're safe as long as they refrain from injecting any brain cells into Britney Spears.
Wasn't there a film about this, though?
I think it was called The Mouse That Roared?
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147545</id>
	<title>Aahh crap. Back to the Chimera project!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This annoys me, as I once saw a drama about this sort of thing and I swore I would eat my hat if that sort of nonsense ever came to pass.</p><p>It was Mr Ed that I was watching.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This annoys me , as I once saw a drama about this sort of thing and I swore I would eat my hat if that sort of nonsense ever came to pass.It was Mr Ed that I was watching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This annoys me, as I once saw a drama about this sort of thing and I swore I would eat my hat if that sort of nonsense ever came to pass.It was Mr Ed that I was watching.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147559</id>
	<title>Re:Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>artor3</author>
	<datestamp>1243625340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps, but The Secret of MPIEA just doesn't have the same ring to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps , but The Secret of MPIEA just does n't have the same ring to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps, but The Secret of MPIEA just doesn't have the same ring to it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148613</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243688640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's ok, the research is bound to lead to at least one really smart mouse.</p><p>And he will try to take over the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's ok , the research is bound to lead to at least one really smart mouse.And he will try to take over the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's ok, the research is bound to lead to at least one really smart mouse.And he will try to take over the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28162057</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243772400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's pathetic. It's already clear enough that most animals you could think of are conscious, can reason and experience emotions. The debate only continues because people like you don't like the implication that humans aren't so special.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's pathetic .
It 's already clear enough that most animals you could think of are conscious , can reason and experience emotions .
The debate only continues because people like you do n't like the implication that humans are n't so special .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's pathetic.
It's already clear enough that most animals you could think of are conscious, can reason and experience emotions.
The debate only continues because people like you don't like the implication that humans aren't so special.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147585</id>
	<title>First words</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1243625880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, no and where's my tea?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , no and where 's my tea ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, no and where's my tea?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150529</id>
	<title>Mutants?</title>
	<author>Eternal Annoyance</author>
	<datestamp>1243708440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With the current rate of development we'll be creating an intelligent species which will be perfectly able to function as slaves in about onehundredfifty years. Since they technically won't be human, we can trample their rights in whatever way we wish... until they revolt.<br><br>So, how about taking a long, hard look at "human" rights?</htmltext>
<tokenext>With the current rate of development we 'll be creating an intelligent species which will be perfectly able to function as slaves in about onehundredfifty years .
Since they technically wo n't be human , we can trample their rights in whatever way we wish... until they revolt.So , how about taking a long , hard look at " human " rights ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With the current rate of development we'll be creating an intelligent species which will be perfectly able to function as slaves in about onehundredfifty years.
Since they technically won't be human, we can trample their rights in whatever way we wish... until they revolt.So, how about taking a long, hard look at "human" rights?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147639</id>
	<title>Welcome!</title>
	<author>Anubis IV</author>
	<datestamp>1243626660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, welcome our (soon-to-be) new, ultrasonic mice overlords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome our ( soon-to-be ) new , ultrasonic mice overlords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome our (soon-to-be) new, ultrasonic mice overlords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147675</id>
	<title>cancelling accidental mod</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243713900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>i think</htmltext>
<tokenext>i think</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i think</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28180567</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>cduffy</author>
	<datestamp>1243949940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It takes only a single counterexample to shed doubt on a standing theory and suggest new research is needed. Read the introductory chapter of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Phantoms-Brain-Probing-Mysteries-Human/dp/0688172172" title="amazon.com">Phantoms in the Brain</a> [amazon.com] for more discussion of the usefulness of single, exceptional cases (and the rest of the book -- it's an interesting read!).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It takes only a single counterexample to shed doubt on a standing theory and suggest new research is needed .
Read the introductory chapter of Phantoms in the Brain [ amazon.com ] for more discussion of the usefulness of single , exceptional cases ( and the rest of the book -- it 's an interesting read !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It takes only a single counterexample to shed doubt on a standing theory and suggest new research is needed.
Read the introductory chapter of Phantoms in the Brain [amazon.com] for more discussion of the usefulness of single, exceptional cases (and the rest of the book -- it's an interesting read!
).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149751</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147961</id>
	<title>FOXP2 saga</title>
	<author>Device666</author>
	<datestamp>1243675140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
We should beware of popular reports of scientific discoveries: almost all the popular reports of FOXP2 claimed that it was the gene for language or even more ludicrously the gene for grammar - the truth is more complicated and far more interesting than that.
</p><p>
No-one should imagine that the development of language relied exclusively on a single mutation in FOXP2. They are many other changes that enable speech. Not least of these are profound anatomical changes that make the human supralarygeal pathway entirely different from any other mammal. The larynx has descended so that it provides a resonant column for speech (but, as an unfortunate side-effect, predisposes humans to choking on food). Also, the nasal cavity can be closed thus preventing vowels from being nasalised and thus increasing their comprehensibility. These changes cannot have happened over such a short period as 100,000 years. Furthermore the genetic basis for language will be found to involve many more genes that influence both cognitive and motor skills
</p><p>
Human mind needs human cognition and human cognition relies on human speech. Ultimately, we will find great insight from further unravelling the evolutionary roots of human speech.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We should beware of popular reports of scientific discoveries : almost all the popular reports of FOXP2 claimed that it was the gene for language or even more ludicrously the gene for grammar - the truth is more complicated and far more interesting than that .
No-one should imagine that the development of language relied exclusively on a single mutation in FOXP2 .
They are many other changes that enable speech .
Not least of these are profound anatomical changes that make the human supralarygeal pathway entirely different from any other mammal .
The larynx has descended so that it provides a resonant column for speech ( but , as an unfortunate side-effect , predisposes humans to choking on food ) .
Also , the nasal cavity can be closed thus preventing vowels from being nasalised and thus increasing their comprehensibility .
These changes can not have happened over such a short period as 100,000 years .
Furthermore the genetic basis for language will be found to involve many more genes that influence both cognitive and motor skills Human mind needs human cognition and human cognition relies on human speech .
Ultimately , we will find great insight from further unravelling the evolutionary roots of human speech .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
We should beware of popular reports of scientific discoveries: almost all the popular reports of FOXP2 claimed that it was the gene for language or even more ludicrously the gene for grammar - the truth is more complicated and far more interesting than that.
No-one should imagine that the development of language relied exclusively on a single mutation in FOXP2.
They are many other changes that enable speech.
Not least of these are profound anatomical changes that make the human supralarygeal pathway entirely different from any other mammal.
The larynx has descended so that it provides a resonant column for speech (but, as an unfortunate side-effect, predisposes humans to choking on food).
Also, the nasal cavity can be closed thus preventing vowels from being nasalised and thus increasing their comprehensibility.
These changes cannot have happened over such a short period as 100,000 years.
Furthermore the genetic basis for language will be found to involve many more genes that influence both cognitive and motor skills

Human mind needs human cognition and human cognition relies on human speech.
Ultimately, we will find great insight from further unravelling the evolutionary roots of human speech.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>TheLink</author>
	<datestamp>1243714380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.<br><br>A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and if they don't someone else will do it anyway).<br><br>Will human society be willing to give such transgenic mice, chimps and pigs the full rights as other humans? If we aren't, we shouldn't be doing stuff like this.<br><br>Even if such research can benefit humans in one way, it will cause big problems.<br><br>People may ask: nut who then decides what is allowed and how? If people could manage to decide that certain classes of experiments/research on humans are banned, I'm sure they can figure other stuff out.<br><br>And they should start figuring it out. It's clear we're like toddlers stumbling headlong without looking where we might end up.<br><br>Don't forget: if we start putting too many human genes into animals, it starts to be "experimenting on humans". And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments shouldn't be done on humans.<br><br>There's no end of other things to do. So do those first instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.A lot of scientists ( and other people ) seem to think just because it can be done , it should be done ( and if they do n't someone else will do it anyway ) .Will human society be willing to give such transgenic mice , chimps and pigs the full rights as other humans ?
If we are n't , we should n't be doing stuff like this.Even if such research can benefit humans in one way , it will cause big problems.People may ask : nut who then decides what is allowed and how ?
If people could manage to decide that certain classes of experiments/research on humans are banned , I 'm sure they can figure other stuff out.And they should start figuring it out .
It 's clear we 're like toddlers stumbling headlong without looking where we might end up.Do n't forget : if we start putting too many human genes into animals , it starts to be " experimenting on humans " .
And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments should n't be done on humans.There 's no end of other things to do .
So do those first instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately I believe people will cross many such lines way before human society is ready.A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and if they don't someone else will do it anyway).Will human society be willing to give such transgenic mice, chimps and pigs the full rights as other humans?
If we aren't, we shouldn't be doing stuff like this.Even if such research can benefit humans in one way, it will cause big problems.People may ask: nut who then decides what is allowed and how?
If people could manage to decide that certain classes of experiments/research on humans are banned, I'm sure they can figure other stuff out.And they should start figuring it out.
It's clear we're like toddlers stumbling headlong without looking where we might end up.Don't forget: if we start putting too many human genes into animals, it starts to be "experimenting on humans".
And I think most of us would prefer to live in a world where certain experiments shouldn't be done on humans.There's no end of other things to do.
So do those first instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149041</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243695420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a stupid argument because the average user needs a web browser to download another web browser, they don't have the disc lying around. (Can you even get a disc for Firefox?) They could technically do it via FTP, if they had any idea how, but they don't.</p><p>Taking the browser away from the user only hurts the user. IE's market share is plummeting anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a stupid argument because the average user needs a web browser to download another web browser , they do n't have the disc lying around .
( Can you even get a disc for Firefox ?
) They could technically do it via FTP , if they had any idea how , but they do n't.Taking the browser away from the user only hurts the user .
IE 's market share is plummeting anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a stupid argument because the average user needs a web browser to download another web browser, they don't have the disc lying around.
(Can you even get a disc for Firefox?
) They could technically do it via FTP, if they had any idea how, but they don't.Taking the browser away from the user only hurts the user.
IE's market share is plummeting anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147855</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149617</id>
	<title>Pinkie &amp; The Brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243701000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're Pinkie &amp; the Brain.  They're Pinkie &amp; the Brain.<br>One is a genius.  The other's insane.<br>To prove their mousie worth, they'll rule the universe,<br>They're Pinkie, Pinkie &amp; the Brain, Brain, Brain...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're Pinkie &amp; the Brain .
They 're Pinkie &amp; the Brain.One is a genius .
The other 's insane.To prove their mousie worth , they 'll rule the universe,They 're Pinkie , Pinkie &amp; the Brain , Brain , Brain.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're Pinkie &amp; the Brain.
They're Pinkie &amp; the Brain.One is a genius.
The other's insane.To prove their mousie worth, they'll rule the universe,They're Pinkie, Pinkie &amp; the Brain, Brain, Brain...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147751</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>giorgist</author>
	<datestamp>1243714980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision"<br><br>Any advance on knowledge breaks the above. We need myth to keep us going while we fill in the blanks with knowledge.<br>You want to keep myth ? Good for you, we need people like you to keep feeding scientists wile scientists work away<br>doing non food producing research. You are not a total loss<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision " Any advance on knowledge breaks the above .
We need myth to keep us going while we fill in the blanks with knowledge.You want to keep myth ?
Good for you , we need people like you to keep feeding scientists wile scientists work awaydoing non food producing research .
You are not a total loss .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I would rather keep the ongoing debate and not have a decision"Any advance on knowledge breaks the above.
We need myth to keep us going while we fill in the blanks with knowledge.You want to keep myth ?
Good for you, we need people like you to keep feeding scientists wile scientists work awaydoing non food producing research.
You are not a total loss ...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147665</id>
	<title>Re:Life imitates art?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243713600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since when is nickel-metal hydride a secret?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since when is nickel-metal hydride a secret ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since when is nickel-metal hydride a secret?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149763</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1243702140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>baby's first words - "got cheese, motherfucker?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>baby 's first words - " got cheese , motherfucker ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>baby's first words - "got cheese, motherfucker?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148531</id>
	<title>Perfect</title>
	<author>DarkOx</author>
	<datestamp>1243687200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I get tired of listing to others peoples pointless conversation I can only imagine how boring listing to a mouse tell me about his weekend is going to be.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I get tired of listing to others peoples pointless conversation I can only imagine how boring listing to a mouse tell me about his weekend is going to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I get tired of listing to others peoples pointless conversation I can only imagine how boring listing to a mouse tell me about his weekend is going to be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149817</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243702560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and if they don't someone else will do it anyway).</p></div><p> <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6ljFaKRTrI" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">We do what we must because we can.</a> [youtube.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A lot of scientists ( and other people ) seem to think just because it can be done , it should be done ( and if they do n't someone else will do it anyway ) .
We do what we must because we can .
[ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A lot of scientists (and other people) seem to think just because it can be done, it should be done (and if they don't someone else will do it anyway).
We do what we must because we can.
[youtube.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149565</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Bat Country</author>
	<datestamp>1243700520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is going to sound intentionally inflammatory - that's because it is. I'm tired of hearing the same tired complaints without any sort of logical foundation or any real argument presented at all. My intention is not to offend you and walk off with a smirk, but to offend you and have you walk off with doubts.</p><p>Why should we give equal rights to an animal just because it has a few human genes in it?</p><p>That's like giving a used condom the right to vote.  The presence of human genetic material does not imbue some magical property on the animal or object which makes it suddenly one of God's Chosen Few (tm).</p><p>Luddite attitudes like that - people cowering in fear of accidentally doing something that they'd regret later - never accomplish anything of lasting value. The people who are praised throughout history are the ones who made a stir, whether they be Saints, scientists, or world leaders. As a species we admire the agents of change, even if we detest them. We may not approve of their actions, but we stand in awe of what they've accomplished.</p><p>If you as an individual are too frightened of a future in which people are touching the Magic Genome (tm) then there's a simple solution - don't take advantage of any of the fruits of current longevity research and die off before it becomes your problem. The rest of us will probably thank you - when you hold up progress in medical research because you have a moral problem with some guy diddling a mouse in a lab somewhere, you ensure that hundreds of people will die and thousands more will have a reduced quality of life due to the lack of the breakthroughs which may have helped them</p><p>They may not even be alive today. It may be somebody born tomorrow with a congenital defect who is the first beneficiary of this research.  It might be your granddad or even yourself.  Ethical treatment of test subjects is necessary, obviously, and we (the public) pay a higher price for research because of this need.  But to suggest that the mere introduction of human tissue into a subject makes it eligible for equal human rights is magical thinking, and destructive to research.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is going to sound intentionally inflammatory - that 's because it is .
I 'm tired of hearing the same tired complaints without any sort of logical foundation or any real argument presented at all .
My intention is not to offend you and walk off with a smirk , but to offend you and have you walk off with doubts.Why should we give equal rights to an animal just because it has a few human genes in it ? That 's like giving a used condom the right to vote .
The presence of human genetic material does not imbue some magical property on the animal or object which makes it suddenly one of God 's Chosen Few ( tm ) .Luddite attitudes like that - people cowering in fear of accidentally doing something that they 'd regret later - never accomplish anything of lasting value .
The people who are praised throughout history are the ones who made a stir , whether they be Saints , scientists , or world leaders .
As a species we admire the agents of change , even if we detest them .
We may not approve of their actions , but we stand in awe of what they 've accomplished.If you as an individual are too frightened of a future in which people are touching the Magic Genome ( tm ) then there 's a simple solution - do n't take advantage of any of the fruits of current longevity research and die off before it becomes your problem .
The rest of us will probably thank you - when you hold up progress in medical research because you have a moral problem with some guy diddling a mouse in a lab somewhere , you ensure that hundreds of people will die and thousands more will have a reduced quality of life due to the lack of the breakthroughs which may have helped themThey may not even be alive today .
It may be somebody born tomorrow with a congenital defect who is the first beneficiary of this research .
It might be your granddad or even yourself .
Ethical treatment of test subjects is necessary , obviously , and we ( the public ) pay a higher price for research because of this need .
But to suggest that the mere introduction of human tissue into a subject makes it eligible for equal human rights is magical thinking , and destructive to research .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is going to sound intentionally inflammatory - that's because it is.
I'm tired of hearing the same tired complaints without any sort of logical foundation or any real argument presented at all.
My intention is not to offend you and walk off with a smirk, but to offend you and have you walk off with doubts.Why should we give equal rights to an animal just because it has a few human genes in it?That's like giving a used condom the right to vote.
The presence of human genetic material does not imbue some magical property on the animal or object which makes it suddenly one of God's Chosen Few (tm).Luddite attitudes like that - people cowering in fear of accidentally doing something that they'd regret later - never accomplish anything of lasting value.
The people who are praised throughout history are the ones who made a stir, whether they be Saints, scientists, or world leaders.
As a species we admire the agents of change, even if we detest them.
We may not approve of their actions, but we stand in awe of what they've accomplished.If you as an individual are too frightened of a future in which people are touching the Magic Genome (tm) then there's a simple solution - don't take advantage of any of the fruits of current longevity research and die off before it becomes your problem.
The rest of us will probably thank you - when you hold up progress in medical research because you have a moral problem with some guy diddling a mouse in a lab somewhere, you ensure that hundreds of people will die and thousands more will have a reduced quality of life due to the lack of the breakthroughs which may have helped themThey may not even be alive today.
It may be somebody born tomorrow with a congenital defect who is the first beneficiary of this research.
It might be your granddad or even yourself.
Ethical treatment of test subjects is necessary, obviously, and we (the public) pay a higher price for research because of this need.
But to suggest that the mere introduction of human tissue into a subject makes it eligible for equal human rights is magical thinking, and destructive to research.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154995</id>
	<title>Re:Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243699140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd eat pork with human genes in it if they also added some bear genes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd eat pork with human genes in it if they also added some bear genes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd eat pork with human genes in it if they also added some bear genes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543</id>
	<title>Where is the line?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm assuming most people here won't have a problem with this research.  But truly, where is the line?  What about injecting human brain cells into mice?  How about into chimps?  Do we have any moral obligations not to cross this line?  I am in awe and at the same time terrified about the future.</p><p>This article raises some of these questions.  It's quite interesting that it was written in 2004.  It even mentions the FOXP2 gene.<br><a href="http://www.reason.com/news/show/34941.html" title="reason.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.reason.com/news/show/34941.html</a> [reason.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm assuming most people here wo n't have a problem with this research .
But truly , where is the line ?
What about injecting human brain cells into mice ?
How about into chimps ?
Do we have any moral obligations not to cross this line ?
I am in awe and at the same time terrified about the future.This article raises some of these questions .
It 's quite interesting that it was written in 2004 .
It even mentions the FOXP2 gene.http : //www.reason.com/news/show/34941.html [ reason.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm assuming most people here won't have a problem with this research.
But truly, where is the line?
What about injecting human brain cells into mice?
How about into chimps?
Do we have any moral obligations not to cross this line?
I am in awe and at the same time terrified about the future.This article raises some of these questions.
It's quite interesting that it was written in 2004.
It even mentions the FOXP2 gene.http://www.reason.com/news/show/34941.html [reason.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150447</id>
	<title>Can't believe this wasn't first post...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243707720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I, for one, welcome our new, talking, mice overlords!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome our new , talking , mice overlords !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome our new, talking, mice overlords!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149631</id>
	<title>Re:Basal Ganglia - SHIT!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243701060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry, a few corrections:</p><p>- The basal ganglia are not a part of the limbic system. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbic\_system" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">limbic system</a> [wikipedia.org] consists of nuclei such as the amygdala, hippocampus etc. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal\_ganglia" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">basal ganglia</a> [wikipedia.org] consist of distinct structures like the Striatum (where this study found increased plasticity in FOXP2 mice), Globus Pallidus, Substantia Nigra etc.</p><p>- Like you say, the limbic system is where emotions are generated. The basal ganglia, however, act more like a gating device, choosing the most appropriate action (i.e. the one that leads to the highest reward) in a given situation from possible actions presented in the cortex. Your link to cursing is interesting, because you can also interpret the role of the basal ganglia here as gating a normally unappropriate action. This, however, does not mean, that the motor plan to curse was generated in the basal ganglia.</p><p>- You can't possibly infer that the mice is cursing. They might be however, I know I would!</p><p>You are right about one thing though, a cursing monkey would be pretty awesome!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry , a few corrections : - The basal ganglia are not a part of the limbic system .
The limbic system [ wikipedia.org ] consists of nuclei such as the amygdala , hippocampus etc .
The basal ganglia [ wikipedia.org ] consist of distinct structures like the Striatum ( where this study found increased plasticity in FOXP2 mice ) , Globus Pallidus , Substantia Nigra etc.- Like you say , the limbic system is where emotions are generated .
The basal ganglia , however , act more like a gating device , choosing the most appropriate action ( i.e .
the one that leads to the highest reward ) in a given situation from possible actions presented in the cortex .
Your link to cursing is interesting , because you can also interpret the role of the basal ganglia here as gating a normally unappropriate action .
This , however , does not mean , that the motor plan to curse was generated in the basal ganglia.- You ca n't possibly infer that the mice is cursing .
They might be however , I know I would ! You are right about one thing though , a cursing monkey would be pretty awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry, a few corrections:- The basal ganglia are not a part of the limbic system.
The limbic system [wikipedia.org] consists of nuclei such as the amygdala, hippocampus etc.
The basal ganglia [wikipedia.org] consist of distinct structures like the Striatum (where this study found increased plasticity in FOXP2 mice), Globus Pallidus, Substantia Nigra etc.- Like you say, the limbic system is where emotions are generated.
The basal ganglia, however, act more like a gating device, choosing the most appropriate action (i.e.
the one that leads to the highest reward) in a given situation from possible actions presented in the cortex.
Your link to cursing is interesting, because you can also interpret the role of the basal ganglia here as gating a normally unappropriate action.
This, however, does not mean, that the motor plan to curse was generated in the basal ganglia.- You can't possibly infer that the mice is cursing.
They might be however, I know I would!You are right about one thing though, a cursing monkey would be pretty awesome!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148611</id>
	<title>Re:this can only end..</title>
	<author>Progman3K</author>
	<datestamp>1243688580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists.</p></div></blockquote><p>"How better to disguise their real natures, and how better to guide your thinking. Suddenly running down a maze the wrong way, eating the wrong bit of cheese, unexpectedly dropping dead of myxomatosis, - if it's finely calculated the cumulative effect is enormous."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists .
" How better to disguise their real natures , and how better to guide your thinking .
Suddenly running down a maze the wrong way , eating the wrong bit of cheese , unexpectedly dropping dead of myxomatosis , - if it 's finely calculated the cumulative effect is enormous .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the mice will suddenly start to develop extreme communication skills and figure out how to upset the results of the scientists.
"How better to disguise their real natures, and how better to guide your thinking.
Suddenly running down a maze the wrong way, eating the wrong bit of cheese, unexpectedly dropping dead of myxomatosis, - if it's finely calculated the cumulative effect is enormous.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28171293</id>
	<title>so-</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243885440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much longer till posthuman?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much longer till posthuman ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much longer till posthuman?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147783</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243715460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who has spent any time at all around farm animals, will tell you that they ain't got nothin' to say that's worth listening to.  Which is actually much like most of the people in the world.<br>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who has spent any time at all around farm animals , will tell you that they ai n't got nothin ' to say that 's worth listening to .
Which is actually much like most of the people in the world .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who has spent any time at all around farm animals, will tell you that they ain't got nothin' to say that's worth listening to.
Which is actually much like most of the people in the world.
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150587</id>
	<title>Gee, Brain...</title>
	<author>mokus000</author>
	<datestamp>1243708860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What are we going to do tomorrow night?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What are we going to do tomorrow night ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are we going to do tomorrow night?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147583</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, yet I don't want the results...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1243625880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Emotions or not, I'm still eating cows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Emotions or not , I 'm still eating cows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Emotions or not, I'm still eating cows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28151027
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148213
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147727
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149817
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149041
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147855
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148643
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28162057
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149763
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148895
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148053
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147501
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147665
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149565
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147601
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147933
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147583
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147695
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148613
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149639
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150625
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148121
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147783
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148605
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147559
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148793
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28160579
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148835
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28180567
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149631
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28161931
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149749
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150709
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148139
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147707
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154637
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148611
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147751
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149301
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149259
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_05_30_0327219_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149595
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147717
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147831
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149631
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149301
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149763
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148047
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149595
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149751
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28180567
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147543
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148793
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28151027
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148121
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147707
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147683
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154995
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28160579
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147705
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149647
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149565
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28161931
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149749
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149817
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149639
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148061
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147665
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147559
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28150625
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149259
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147501
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147487
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148643
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147855
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147847
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148613
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154637
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148579
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148611
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148605
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147567
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28149923
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_05_30_0327219.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147555
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147751
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147695
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28162057
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147783
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147727
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147697
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28148895
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147583
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147703
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28154259
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_05_30_0327219.28147933
</commentlist>
</conversation>
