You can use arrow keys to navigate in the map.
Static typing allows compilers to optimize in a way that is hardly achievable with dynamic typed languages
Static typing serves as reliable documentation.
Programming tools like IDE's can provide a richer set of supporting features or they are more sophisticated. Mainly regarding refactoring, suggestions, debugging, metrics, detection, prove, inspection, documention, generation, build,...
It is easier to detect and fix compile-time errors than runtime errors.
Static type-checking prevents silly and easy to fix mistakes early enough that could be troublesome to fix in the future.
Static types help you craft a domain model that is logical and consistent.
Dynamic typing languages are much easier to use, learn and faster for prototyping.
Typing is merely one check that can be performed. A comprehensive test suite provides a lot more confidence in the code, and minimises the effectiveness of the type checking.
Static typing leads to large codebases with more files and classes compared to dynamically typed languages. It also forces the continual creation of logic which has nothing to do with the actual problem being solved. And which have to be maintained too.
Dynamic typing has easier access to meta information. This has advantages and disadvantages, like monkey patching. It's more difficult to realise in static typed languages (for compiler creators), but does exist in form of Reflection.
Type systems can sometimes forbid valid programs, especially if a the type system is not very expressive.
Depends on your application. One is not better then another in each and every case.
Developers can focus better in the domain problem using a dynamic typed language because they do not need to worry for pleasing the type-checker
Types are easy to convert from one to another in dynamic languages.
Static typing need to cast.
well typed programs don't go wrong!