Who's cherrypicking now? Horrible things have happened in the name of religion, but then, horrible things have happened in the name of science too. Should we get rid of that as well?

There's one health effect I know of that might affect those living close to a wind turbine, and that's the effect of the strobe shadow created by the turning of the blades. It's been shown to affect health when exposed to it for longer periods. Other than that, no known health effects from living close to one.

Actually, while we may not yet be at CSI or Bones level, forensics can be an amazing thing, so it's not like we have no way to test the stories told by shooters.

When.... I mean if I throw someone off a bridge, they won't be able to recognize me when I'm standing right in front of them doing my best "me" impression.

Can't speak for other countries, but here in Belgium it's not so much the police but the media who will convict you the moment you get even tangentially connected to an investigation. Oversight on the police is pretty strong here, and any kind of procedural fault results in no conviction at all (which is handily abused by lawyers, who will help you get away with mass murder because your arrest warrant wasn't motivated properly). So yes, it seems to be dependent on the country. The media thing gets pretty bad, though, digging into private lives, spreading wild speculations as facts, and then, when it turns out it wasn't you after all, they just jump to the next victim. No apology given.

Awww, not my sole! I just had that meuniered.

I find your statement intriguing, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

This. Companies like to see big fat black numbers at the bottom of the balance sheet. They really don't sit around stroking a pet of some kind and cackling maniacally at their next scheme to put one over on those nasty consumers. Truth is, they don't care about you, they just want your money. If they see ways to get at it better, they'll use them. In this case, targeted advertising should be more effective,, since it will offer you stuff you want (if the targeting system is halfway smart, at least), so you would more likely be interested. Meanwhile, the company can save money because now they just have to advertise to the people who might buy their stuff instead of to everybody, hoping to hit the few % of consumers who need their product. Basically, it's smart missiles vs carpet bombing, and I think we can all agree that smart missiles should cause less collateral damage.

Oh, and before anyone gets the wrong idea: I am 100% against companies gathering (and holding indefinitely) personal data of people who did not give it up freely, knowing what they are getting themselves into. But I am also cynical enough to believe that a large percentage of Facebook, smartphone app, etc users would just shrug if you told them, and say they don't really care. Frankly, I myself don't much care if the corporate world knows I want to buy an inflatable pool, a bulk amount of whipped cream, and a used industrial vacuum cleaner. Let them make of that what they will. I do, however, draw the line at personal information I did not give to them. I do not want to receive mail/phone calls/creepy ads that state my (alleged) location/names of my close friends/etc, unless I gave that information to you personally.

I have read the books, and while a big deal is made about sex, it's more about the not getting any. Up until the last book, that is, where there is indeed some (quickly faded to black and not very explicit) canoodling going on.

You get (some of) what you want and still complain?