NFL teams don't make their schedule. Can only play who is on your list. There are no style points in the NFL. Doesn't matter how you win, so long as you win. 2003 should have taught us that. Keep. fuging. pounding.
One, check out the actual magnitude. The weight of the evidence suggests that Julius gave nothing of value regarding the atomic weapons project, but the US government needed a scape goat, and he was a spy. Khrushchev's statements are directly refuted by the actual handlers involved and the scientists that received the information. It is possible they are lying and he is telling the truth; even if so, given what we know he actually shared (and even if we assume the accounts of his handlers and the scientists are wrong, and it was of value), he isn't solely or even partially responsible for the Cold War or the Korean War, as there HAD to be other spies involved that were doing far more. Two, "knowing is complicit" may seem logical but there exists protections for spouses, and as such, justifying her execution because she knew he was a spy is rather unfair. Furthermore, her actual trial was tainted by perjury - we know this because the primary witness against her has stated such. Thus, her conviction should be overturned. Perhaps we should try her posthumously, or just pronounce that it was a wrongful execution. You are right we were unapologetic back then, but that doesn't mean we have to remain that way. Julius was a spy, but Ethel was a spouse that was used to try to coerce her husband into testimony, and she became a victim when a relative turned on her to save his own wife.
Multiple studies have not shown what you think they have. Please see the cautionary note on http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416 . That should be a red alert. But even if we read it, there is no data. There are a bunch of explanations for things that are unrelated, there is no actual tested hypothesis. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2013/04/26/when-media-uncritically-cover-pseudoscience/#.VhKB7flVhBc if you actually care to read how awful that paper is, without trying to slog through it.
edit: there's also http://pipeline.corante.com/archives/2013/04/30/is_glyphosate_poisoning_everyone.php on that "paper." (btw that is not a study, it is a review... no data presented) Could always read http://rameznaam.com/2013/04/28/the-evidence-on-gmo-safety/ about GMO safety or http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2013/04/12/why-organic-advocates-should-love-gmos/#.VhKGKvlVhBc about how GMOs can lead to better organic crops due to less pesticides.
Awesome. Given that Brazil, India, China, and Canada are some of the other largest producers of GMOs - and that really the only commercial GMO product in Europe is corn that I know of - this figure just shows how it can't possibly be GMOs responsible for mental disorders since they are so prevalent in various parts of Europe, while far less common in, e.g. China, where GMos are quite common.
Please provide one such peer-reviewed study. lol that "studies of GMOs" section is bullshit. We've had studies now for 20+ years. Nothing. I believe the "mouse" study they are referring to was the thoroughly debunked Seralini paper, which used rats, and was totally sensationalized. see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Séralini_affair for details, though I doubt you actually care enough to bother. ARSEN, why not find me an actual scientific study that has not been retracted that shows health effects of GMOs?
Please link me to the research HBO cited that suggested that GMOs were responsible for mental health issues in this country (lol) edit: and fyi a big part of that is the nature of how government agencies determine if something should be sold... for a lot of food items it is a difference between "has it been demonstrated to be safe" versus "has it been demonstrated to be dangerous." and anyway GMO corn is a major crop in Europe, and tho most of it goes to livestock, the starches from it are big in food production. While the US has higher rates of mental illness than other countries, it is possible that has to do with the nature of the reporting. There are countries other than the US with high mental health illness rates, and some countries have higher rates of antidepressant usage than the US.
for one, transgenic crops have not been on the market for 30 years. for two, there is no evidence of harmful effects of any gmo on the market today that has not been thoroughly refuted/retracted. for three, I think I love you for suggesting GMOs are causing mass shootings. I just... think that is the best thing ever.
This is incorrect - the brothers still maintain that their mother is innocent and did so at that time period, too. At no point in the article do they claim their mother was anything but innocent. They admit their father was a spy, though they question the use of the death penalty on him. See http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/10/opinion/the-meeropol-brothers-exonerate-our-mother-ethel-rosenberg.html?ref=topics. Given that his accuser has flat out admitted he lied to protect his wife, there is no way anyone can argue that it was not a wrongful conviction. edit: you can read Sobell's interview at http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/nyregion/12spy.html. Given the way in which he refers to Ethel, why do you suspect that the brothers would believe she was guilty now?
Do you include plastic surgery in this etc? I think that people who get gender reassignment surgery do need help - and they actually do typically get it, but help doesn't mean that they wouldn't get the surgery, it just means counseling. Gender dysphoria is a diagnosis in the DSM V I believe, though how long it lasts there is another question