Yes. It's almost a non-story. Courts indicate law needs updating, law gets updating.
You complain about something being disgusting, then propose something else even more disgusting as being funny. That you would find such a video funny is sickening.
Calculus isn't an invention, it's a discovery. It's not patentable. Calling them the "finest minds" seems a bit of hyperbole, they made great discoveries, but you don't need the finest minds to do what they did (Newton looks rather all too human and of his age, particularly with regards to his Biblical literalism and alchemy). It seems likely that equally great minds concurrent with Newton and Leibniz would have made the discoveries. They weren't in isolation and the progress in maths makes certain discoveries more likely at certain periods when the necessary pieces are in place.
The sort of places these are published in have no standards in the first place. There are always predatory journals and also good quality journals. The issue here is that IEEE and Springer have low standards about what journals they allow.
It is. This was tested in a eurobarometer by replacing "astrology" with "horoscopes" http://ec.europa.eu/public_opi... . The percentage of support dropped from 41% to 13%, indicating that most people do indeed mix them up.
" The problem is just not young people think astrology is science, scientists think the same way." That is the most ridiculous statement I have heard. One contrarian scientist doesn't equate to "scientists" without further qualification.
Continental drift wasn't a theory, it was a proposed historical fact. Wegener had no mechanism to suggest it which made sense, and his mechanisms where (and still are) rejected. It was the theory of plate tectonics that confirmed the historical fact of continental drift. It was not Wegener who made a concrete proposal of plate tectonics as that article you link to appears to suggest.
How did they get the IP addresses of people using a streaming website that they don't operate (and I doubt the records where handed over by this non-German website)?
No. ArXiv papers are generally not resubmitted after being peer reviewed (that would be against the rules of most journals), and no peer review is done on ArXiv.
The GPL exists because, at present, copyright on code etc exists. If copyright did not exist on code, then the GPL would no longer be necessary.
You may have caught a cold but attributed to flu since your sister was infected with it (correlation doesn't imply causation).
I am aware of that list. The operating system itself is not on that list, specifically the kernel as well. Consider that OpenDarwin shut down for the express reason that they couldn't get the code off Apple, I don't see what you are talking about.
No it isn't open source. They haven't released their code in a long long time.
Is this a new variation to the Schrodinger's cat problem?
The "test" was already done in Japan which stopped the jabs years ago. It made no difference to autism rates.