I forgot to mention that covering hundreds of thousands of acres with herbicide is in itself "selective pressure", so your b and c are invalidated as well.
And that's precisely why every single time you take your kids to the doctors for ear infections they prescribe Amoxicillin, which is a penicillin derivative.
The suggestion that there is no danger from eating food with genetic modifications is mostly untested, but is quickly being proved flat wrong
While that may be profitable for Monsanto, it is horrible for our ecosystem. RoundupReady are genetically modified using e. coli bacteria to insert the genetic material. In order to verify that the genetic modification is successful, they also include the gene for penicillin immunity. Now we have massive numbers of organisms with the gene sequence necessary to be immune to penicillin, and more producers of GMO seeds means more genetic modifications in the wild. Monsanto has already come out with 2,4D (a component of agent orange) immune seed to prepare for the expiration of RoundupReady patents. It's also worth mentioning that a significant number of common weeds are immune to Roundup now.
Wow! I only share pics online with Google+, precisely because of the circles. I don't want people who pledged the same fraternity as I did getting pictures of my 4 year old daughter's birthday party. I may want to share the picture of the latest glass of home brew with the fraternity brothers, and not all the friends in the area who have children who go to school with my 6 year old. It's interesting to me that the reason you don't like Google+ is the exact reason that I chose to use it for sharing pictures.
You're missing a major contributor to academic research in point 2. 28% of funding for biomedical research comes from the US NIH. The NIH only contributes to new drugs that have a material impact on the improvement of public health. I would easily believe that 72% of new drugs to market provide little additional benefit over preceding drugs and are mostly there to pad the pockets of Big Pharma. In order to pass the FDA they only need to show that they are as effective and no less safe.
No, but I don't log into Apple's website to say that I don't want their stuff. I do, however, send requests for vehicles with clean diesel engines to be sold by my local Ford, GM, Mazda and Toyota dealers in the US. I think maybe if they hear that there's consumer demand I might be able to get one at some point. It's just a consumer saying "Hey guys, this new thing is neat, but it'd be really nice if it had xyz widget. In fact, once it has xyz widget, I'll buy it."
All of the euthanasias in the US are against the will of the person dying, we just use the euphemism "death penalty". I'm constantly amazed at how the side that's "Pro-Life" is so intent on killing adults.
And I see nothing in that link that suggests that the EPA is interested in legislating, controlling or regulating human breathing. I do notice, specifically, that motor vehicles are singled out. It doesn't mention Methane gas from livestock, coal power plant emissions, or any other industrial emissions. There is no one out there trying to regulate the CO2 in the air you exhale. Motor vehicles emit far more CO2 than you do when you breathe.
I'd say that I should have seen the WSJ link and should have remembered not to feed the trolls, but that would be an abusive ad hominem fallacy. Your argument isn't wrong because I think you're a troll. Your argument is wrong because it contains a fallacy. Your fallacy is the classic Straw Man. The EPA says CO2 from cars falls under their jurisdiction and will be regulated. You over simplify and twist that to suggest that all CO2 produced then falls under the EPA's jurisdiction. You attack the misinterpretation with your breathing example.
Sources owned by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp are no longer considered non-biased. Anyone could then counteract your argument citing moveon.org or a lefty publication. I do believe that regulating breathing is a good idea, though. Everyone should do it before responding to this type of FUD. No legislation necessary.
Now listen here, Anonymous Coward
We present to you this marvelous award:
For trolling on Apple and Anti Disney gibe
You have earned the right to buy a Mazda CX-5
The publicity is worth far more than they're paying in the suit. Streisand was already famous in 2003, this campground's 15 minutes of fame were over once the headlines stopped. Suing Google gets their name alongside Google's name, and the press coverage it brings is significant. I'd say they've already won. All they need to do now, as someone else mentioned, is build something that is very tasteful and respectful of those who died. Perhaps they could sponsor legislation for better safety standards after their lawyers are done losing a suit they don't expect to win.
"Standing on what little land exists here, you watch a giant red [valid soul with a high degree of vertical challenge] sink slowly into the horizon of a hot ocean."
. . ..an industry average of 278 problems per 100 vehicles, but this year, the number fell to 132.
Sure, the average has been cut in half, but there's still an average of more than 1 problem per vehicle sold. How can they claim that "Bad cars have gone extinct"? I'd like to see that tagline when it's measured in under 9 problems per thousand cars.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought I was reading "news for nerds".
It really was only an attempt at humor.
Our republic has lost almost all pretense of democracy, and now there's a massive build up of drones?
What's next, buying an army of clones from North Korea?
And people questioned just how visionary George Lucas is.
Putty and paint make it what it ain't.
Amen, we also need a different term for the stuff that sits on top of the liquid in a cappuccino.
I forgot to mention that covering hundreds of thousands of acres with herbicide is in itself "selective pressure", so your b and c are invalidated as well.
And that's precisely why every single time you take your kids to the doctors for ear infections they prescribe Amoxicillin, which is a penicillin derivative.
The suggestion that there is no danger from eating food with genetic modifications is mostly untested, but is quickly being proved flat wrong
I had a Palm Treo that had a physical slide switch to lock and unlock...
I found this article from 1998 about Novartis and maize grown with antibiotic immunity, as well as this article on Monsanto Roundup Ready cottonseed, as well as this article on GMO safety directly from Monsanto which specifically states that they build in antibiotic resistance.
I take everything I said about the Supreme court doing the right thing back. When other justices recuse themselves over minor conflicts of interest, when it comes to Monsanto, Clarence Thomas fails to see any conflict at all.
If you are correct then this means that the fight over the patent on the gene that causes breast cancer is likely to result in an invalidated patent when the Supreme Court takes the case.
While that may be profitable for Monsanto, it is horrible for our ecosystem. RoundupReady are genetically modified using e. coli bacteria to insert the genetic material. In order to verify that the genetic modification is successful, they also include the gene for penicillin immunity. Now we have massive numbers of organisms with the gene sequence necessary to be immune to penicillin, and more producers of GMO seeds means more genetic modifications in the wild. Monsanto has already come out with 2,4D (a component of agent orange) immune seed to prepare for the expiration of RoundupReady patents. It's also worth mentioning that a significant number of common weeds are immune to Roundup now.
Wow! I only share pics online with Google+, precisely because of the circles. I don't want people who pledged the same fraternity as I did getting pictures of my 4 year old daughter's birthday party. I may want to share the picture of the latest glass of home brew with the fraternity brothers, and not all the friends in the area who have children who go to school with my 6 year old. It's interesting to me that the reason you don't like Google+ is the exact reason that I chose to use it for sharing pictures.
You're missing a major contributor to academic research in point 2. 28% of funding for biomedical research comes from the US NIH. The NIH only contributes to new drugs that have a material impact on the improvement of public health. I would easily believe that 72% of new drugs to market provide little additional benefit over preceding drugs and are mostly there to pad the pockets of Big Pharma. In order to pass the FDA they only need to show that they are as effective and no less safe.
Okay, now I'll just wait for the cyanogen mod to be available for Sync before buying a Ford. I wonder how binary those firmware updates are . . .
No, but I don't log into Apple's website to say that I don't want their stuff. I do, however, send requests for vehicles with clean diesel engines to be sold by my local Ford, GM, Mazda and Toyota dealers in the US. I think maybe if they hear that there's consumer demand I might be able to get one at some point. It's just a consumer saying "Hey guys, this new thing is neat, but it'd be really nice if it had xyz widget. In fact, once it has xyz widget, I'll buy it."
Oh no, don't tell me . . . He had videos of Ms. Piggy molesting Kermit.
I knew she was crazy, but that's nucking futs.
All of the euthanasias in the US are against the will of the person dying, we just use the euphemism "death penalty". I'm constantly amazed at how the side that's "Pro-Life" is so intent on killing adults.
And I see nothing in that link that suggests that the EPA is interested in legislating, controlling or regulating human breathing. I do notice, specifically, that motor vehicles are singled out. It doesn't mention Methane gas from livestock, coal power plant emissions, or any other industrial emissions. There is no one out there trying to regulate the CO2 in the air you exhale. Motor vehicles emit far more CO2 than you do when you breathe.
I'd say that I should have seen the WSJ link and should have remembered not to feed the trolls, but that would be an abusive ad hominem fallacy. Your argument isn't wrong because I think you're a troll. Your argument is wrong because it contains a fallacy. Your fallacy is the classic Straw Man. The EPA says CO2 from cars falls under their jurisdiction and will be regulated. You over simplify and twist that to suggest that all CO2 produced then falls under the EPA's jurisdiction. You attack the misinterpretation with your breathing example.
Sources owned by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp are no longer considered non-biased. Anyone could then counteract your argument citing moveon.org or a lefty publication. I do believe that regulating breathing is a good idea, though. Everyone should do it before responding to this type of FUD. No legislation necessary.
Now listen here, Anonymous Coward
We present to you this marvelous award:
For trolling on Apple and Anti Disney gibe
You have earned the right to buy a Mazda CX-5
The publicity is worth far more than they're paying in the suit. Streisand was already famous in 2003, this campground's 15 minutes of fame were over once the headlines stopped. Suing Google gets their name alongside Google's name, and the press coverage it brings is significant. I'd say they've already won. All they need to do now, as someone else mentioned, is build something that is very tasteful and respectful of those who died. Perhaps they could sponsor legislation for better safety standards after their lawyers are done losing a suit they don't expect to win.
It looks a lot more like Blender to me, too much 3d in there to be Photoshop.
"Standing on what little land exists here, you watch a giant red [valid soul with a high degree of vertical challenge] sink slowly into the horizon of a hot ocean."
. . . .an industry average of 278 problems per 100 vehicles, but this year, the number fell to 132.
Sure, the average has been cut in half, but there's still an average of more than 1 problem per vehicle sold. How can they claim that "Bad cars have gone extinct"? I'd like to see that tagline when it's measured in under 9 problems per thousand cars.