Enzora

I'd rather rock you like a Hurricane.

The guy in the Cobalt was probably American too. :AH-HA_wink:

So, now that we know everyone is ok . . . is it appropriate to break out the champagne?

So the only non-neutral color on the Outlook is red? Weak, Saturn. Very weak. Now see, the Aura does much better. Offering red AND blue!

Is that an idrive-style controller under the nav screen? The interior's an improvement, but the exterior changes leave me cold. The sedan looks too bloated now, with too much of a mini M45 look, and the coupe looks like an Acura.

looks pretty cool to me. With a few tweaks (c-pillar, no color-changing headlights, real interior) it could be a very popular model.

Umm...cars have gotten a LOT more fuel efficient over the last couple decades. But since gas prices have, until recently, remained ridiculously low, there's been no real incentive to use the technology to make them have better gas mileage. So instead, they used the efficiency to make bigger and more powerful cars. Remember, necessity is the mother of invention.

dot dot dot

Something like these, perhaps?

Umm, Even the Aura concept looked like a Sebring, just with much better execution. Were you too distracted by the big shiny wheels to notice this?

Did it serve seafood?

Me want...

About the chrome bar in the grille. Saturn needs to either have it extend all the way to the top, or have it lower, so there's more of an obviously intentional gap. Because the current design just makes it look like the hood isn't closed. Other than that nit-pick, I don't have much to complain about. The Outlook looks great.

I like it. The teaser pic scared me, but it looks so much better in these photos. The interior changes will take some getting used to, but it looks good.

Wow, man. I don't even know what to say to that, except I'm sorry about Lucky.

Wow. Just wow. I've also heard of studies that show discrepancies between races in average scores, but there's one thing that the studies I've seen have that it appears the ones you're talking about do not. The ones I've seen account for confounding variables. Confounding variable: a particular type of extraneous variable which for some reason has been left uncontrolled. The confounding variable in this situation? Those environmental factors that you say are somehow magically negated when people reach adulthood, namely education levels, of both the person in question and their parents. Intelligence Quotient tests are standardized tests, and ARE affected by education levels. When you break each race down into education levels, race doesn't matter in standardized tests. People whose parents went to college and who had a good education themselves will score higher on average on IQ tests than people with lesser education backgrounds. And it doesn't take a genius to figure out how educational opportunities have been different among the races. Asian Americans have an advantage because certain restrictions were made so that more of the immigrants who came to America already had higher education. Whites have an advantage because they've been running the show, and so on.

You're right. It does startle me. As a student of sociology, I've seen plenty of studies where beliefs such as that have been debunked, so I have to know where the f@#k you got information like that.

Okay, from the perspective of someone who's incredibly interested in psychological/sociological issues: Limiting the factors that influence to purely genetics or purely environment is just stupid. It's been pretty much proven that personality traits are a combination of genetic predisposition and environmental influence. Someone mentioned twin studies where twins have much higher concordance rates of having the same sexuality than other groups. But at the same time, there are still plenty of cases where there are two people who are "wired" identically, but where one likes members of the same sex, while one likes members of the opposite sex. Weird, eh? That puts a big dent in the idea that homosexuality is some genetic flaw or population control device. Another atttack on that one? The fact that homosexuals have been reproducing since the beginning of time. King James(of King James Bible fame) is a good example. His gay affairs were quite well-known, but he still had heirs. (Which reminds me of a good tangent--anyone find it funny that the Bible that homophobic zealots are always thumping is named after a gay guy? ) Still, he's not the best example, since he was a king, and thus pressured to produce an heir. A better example can also see this everyday with homosexual couples who want children of their own. Even though they may not be inclined to have sex with women, many still have that ingrained urge to reproduce/be parents. The opposite is also true--there are also many heterosexuals who don't have any desire to have kids. There have been many ways in which people have done this, with more developing all the time. Artificial fertilization, adoption, or, in many cases in history, just sucking it up and getting it on with someone of the opposite sex. I think another angle that deserves looking at is the treatment of homosexual relations by different cultures. The ancient Greeks were so sexist that homosexuality was seen as superior, the reasoning being that men are just naturally better at everything, even sex. For them, heterosexual sex was just for procreation. (But still notice how the desire to procreate was there, even in gay societies.) Ancient Rome (one of the most dominant societies in all of history, I might add) didn't even have a concept of heterosexuality or homosexuality. Julius Caesar was often ridiculed for being a whore who slept his way to the top and was referred to as "every woman's husband and every man's wife." For someone to like men or women exclusively was considered an anomaly. Which brings me to my final point, one which this thread has actually adressed pretty well, though most likely unwittingly. That is the fact that although in Rome, everyone was bisexual, and such reports such as Mr. Kinsey's also support the idea that a large portion of the population is bisexual, bisexuals are often not even recognized as a real group, often even by homosexuals. Ever hear the phrase "bi now, gay later?" We live in a VERY polarizing society. Gay or straight, capitalist pig or commie bastard, black or white, the list goes on and on. The idea of bisexuals goes against a lot of the common notions of this country. Remember when I said that personality traits were a combination of nurture and nature? Yeah, back to that now. Here's my view on it. Sure there are lots of people who exclusively like men, and who exclusively like women. But I also think that there are lots of people who just have a preference for one or the other. Society says "well, Jack, you gotta choose, will it be Ennis or Lureen?" The person goes with the one they prefer, and suppresses whatever attraction they have for the other sex. And of course, this is where you get some of your more naturally homophobic people. Studies show that homophobics have a higher rate of arousal when shown homosexual acts than those who are more secure. They compensate for not being allowed to express their homosexual urges healthily by going in the opposite direction and being anti-gay. Of course, then you have people who grow up in societies that are just homophobic, blah blah blah, big picture, blah, and if you're still reading this, I commend you. I've been going on for quite a while. And for the record, I think the Caliber's ugly, and Dodge's commercials annoy me. :AH-HA_wink:

The Peter Principle: The theory that successful members of a hierarchical organization (such as, say, a business like GM) are eventually promoted to their highest level of competence, after which further promotion raises them to a level at which they are incompetent. Anyone care to take a gander at buickman's level of incompetence?

Take a good look at an exotic or classic car for a while and tell me it doesn't remind you of something sensual. Think about it. Doesn't that "coke bottle" shape remind you of anything else?

Sorry, but that just hits a little too close to home to be funny. I mean, my boyfriend's a great guy and all, but sometimes i really do think that he might be gay.

Happy birthday, ocn. Have a good one, mate.

Nah, Land Rover, like most of the successful lines in Ford's family, has maintained pretty good autonomy from the parent company. Besides, the current Range is a BMW design.

Damnit, WMJ, I know you're probably just messing with the people who were complaining about sig size, but if you don't change it, I'm going to drive up to Minnesota and beat you with a Yaris.