That reminded me of this --

http://www.theonion.com/video/apple-introduces-revolutionary-new-laptop-with-no,14299/

Enjoy. :)

I'd guess "none" -- but who cares?

From your very article:

“We estimate that around 90% of the literature on which the conclusions of the report are based is on non-industry funded, peer-reviewed research,” said Sofie Vanthournout, head of the Brussels office of EASAC.

In other words... 90% of the research in this study was non-industry-funded, not 90% of all research on the subject. There's a big difference between the two.

Also from the very next paragraph in your linked article:

“In this specific case, extra care was taken in order to ensure that none of the experts had strong ties with industry, although a certain level of industry connections cannot be completely excluded,” she told EurActiv

Unless they specifically define the phrase "strong ties with industry", which is entirely vague and subjective, I'm going to give a pass on believing it.

But, guess what happens when we cherry-pick quotes from articles! Here, I present a single sentence from YOUR article:

A study by researchers at the University of Caen found that rats fed on Monsanto's NK603 GM maize or exposed to the company's top-selling Roundup weed killer were at higher risk of suffering tumours, multiple organ damage and premature death.

Ah, there we go. See what I did there? I picked a different sentence to quote, so now they support MY position! ROFL! :-D

Meanwhile, I'll continue to do my research, as always... maybe you can work on your reading comprehension. Mmmkay? Ciao!

Just the other day I tried adjusting the time of the Magic Lamp effect in its properties dialog under KDE.

How many desktop effects does Windows have for you to play with and customize?

  If we start to talk about the Unity desktop (which represents a de facto Linux experience to many),

Everyone knows Unity is crap. So is Windows 8. And mostly for the same reasons -- hubris, and a few clowns thinking they're going to change the fundamental paradigm behind the way millions of people use their computers.

Well, except for the people who like Unity... some folks like choices. How many choices do you get with Windows?

What you need to understand is that Linux is not a monolithic thing. Linux as a whole is not tainted because one release of one distro sucks -- because Linux is not a whole anything.

The declining quality of the Linux desktop should be taken very seriously.

That's a rather subjective and vague statement.

As someone who has used Linux desktops almost exclusively for over 12 years now, I have to say I'm quite pleased with the improvements over that time. Well, except for Gnome 3.

Anyway, if Windows floats your boat, great. I hope MS makes Windows for a long time, and that most folks continue to use it, so us Linux geeks can continue to feel smug about it. :)

Yeah, probably. Like those damn hippies of a century ago who brought pasteurization to "kill the toxins". Bullshit, all of it, no doubt.

Or that damn hippy Semmelweis who started that ridiculous hand-washing nonsense.

Let's look at your words again:

All the hippy nonsense about "toxins" is born of ignorance.

Do you wash your hands before you eat? Do you wash vegetables after you get them home from the store? Do you eat food after you've dropped it on the floor? Do you leave raw poultry out in a warm kitchen, and then consume it raw? Do you feed fish every meal to pregnant women? Do you support safety standards for food?

I think you are perfectly mindful of "toxins", you goddamn ignorant hippy! And a fuckin' hypocrite to boot.

All the hippy nonsense about "toxins" is born of ignorance.

Let me tell you something, pal. It is perfectly legitimate to question the safety of EVERYTHING in the food supply... ESPECIALLY things that have not had adequate safety testing -- a criteria that applies PRECISELY to GMO crops.

It is also perfectly legitimate to demand labeling. I want to know what's in my food. Don't you? Or do you just randomly dumpster-dive for calories?

I wonder what your daily diet looks like... because you are either full of shit, or you're a fool.

We're already seeing it. Several species of weeds in the midwest (including the already nearly indestructible pigweed and lamb's quarter) have developed not only resistance to Roundup, but a taste for it as a fertilizer. Glyphosate-loving superweeds are not science fiction or theory; they are already reality.

Talk of stronger herbicides is already happening, including the resurrection of Agent Orange:

http://www.counterpunch.org/2010/07/13/the-escalating-chemical-war-on-weeds/

I hate to be the one to tell you this, because I am about the farthest thing from a Windows fan... but the problem is probably you and the amount of stuff you have starting up on your machine at boot time. Use "msconfig" to turn some shit off. I've gotten lots of Win 7 machines to a minute or less startup, down from 5+ minutes, and the problem is always the same: bloat.

Then again, the obvious question that occurs to me is: if your user experience is so bad, why haven't you switched to something else?

Even then the bugs in Linux still get fixed faster.

But yeah, when volunteers are giving their own time to build me a killer operating system, I'm not going to harass them about a schedule. I give them thanks and positive vibes and sometimes donations. I think we all expect more from paid developers... but we don't always get it.

Haha! And they say piracy is bad!

It's always interesting to follow the money - The journal’s editor-in-chief, Sid-Ali Ouadfeul, works for the Algerian Petroleum Institute

It is good to follow money trails. But I wonder how many people lambasting this journal are noticing the money trail behind GMO crops that leads back to Monsanto. Seems that folks here tend to cherry-pick what science they care to believe, regardless of how tainted it might be.

And (while not pointing fingers at you) the popular belief here seems to be that AGW and GMO are sound, settled science, no matter who pays for the research. I have to just say that that's not a rational or scientific way to develop one's world view.

Waaaait... so NOT labeling foods with the types of ingredients they contain... is sound science?

Wut?

Does the sound science also support repealing the rest of the labeling laws already in place?

I guess I'm having a hard time wrapping my unscientific hillbilly brain around that one, slick.

those who think that the scientific community are all conspiring to earn big bucks from climate change,

Misdirection. Scientists are not the ones looking to cash in -- they are being used by those who are looking to cash in, which is big business.

although quite how they earn this money is never spelled out.

Easy. Just look at where Al Gore invests his money. Hopefully I don't have to spell out how to find that information.

The scientific consensus is that anthropogenic global warming is a fact.

Things, whether they are in fact true or false, do not become true just because sufficient percentages of people believe them.

The consensus in Wisconsin might be that the Packers are the best football team, but that doesn't make it fact. It would simply mean that the majority prefer to remain delusional, rather than change their long-held beliefs.

That is not to suggest that ManBearPig is not real, but it takes more "6 out of 10 scientists believe ManBearPig is real and will kill everyone" to convince the rational mind.

"Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic" is the only phrase that comes to mind.

This has *got* to be trolling. Would it actually be possible for anyone to believe this?

That's how it starts... then slowly, inexorably, it sucks in the victim, drawing its sustenance in the form of human brains, eating our time for energy... thus creating more zombies who go on to further spread the Facebook.