The constitution is there to limit government. There is nothing wrong with limiting government more than the bare minimum limits defined by the constitution. In fact, I would say there is a good case today for rewriting the constitution using far more strict, unambiguous modern language with far more limitations than it currently has.
Link to Original Source
In your example, divergent populations B and C are still fertile with each other.
A great example is the artificial construct of race in humanity. Groups that diverged based on isolation and adapted based on climate, yet any fertile male and any fertile female can still produce offspring.
For me its time for a car upgrade, and I'm strongly considering a Tesla. No more oil changes, ever.
People aren't being forced to install the GMS to sell an Android phone. They are, however, being forced to install the entire GMS or none of it. There's no unbundling of just one or two apps and leaving the rest uninstalled. So if you want to sell an Android that has for example the GMail app or the Google+ app (or the Play Store app, which is the big clincher) then you have to install the others.
This is from my head, so I'm sorry if it's not complete or includes apps not considered part of the GMS suite.
Other than Gmail, Play Store, Youtube, and Maps I can think of:
Play Music, Play Books, Play Games, Play Movies & TV, Play Newsstand, Google search, Google voice search, Google Translate, the Chromecast app, Google+, Google Now, Drive, Chrome, Hangouts, and Google Wallet.
That's nineteen of the twenty I guess. I don't really use the movies/tv app or the newsstand app. The rest I do to some extent. I wonder if the separate Google Settings icon is considered part of the apps suite, or if maybe the Chromecast integration isn't.
Are the default clock, calendar, contacts, calculator, and SMS messaging app (that they keep trying to obsolete in favor of Hangouts) part of the suite?
Google as it turns out has a list of apps for Android and another for iOS in case you want their apps on Apple hardware. Some of those I didn't think to list above.
Poor headline grammar is something up with which we should not put.
People trust scientists who aren't scared of losing their funding. They don't trust scientists who only receive funding according to a politician's agenda.
The solution to trustworthy scientists is to get politics out of research and research funding.
2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 AL Central Division Champs!
Macroevolution, as in, an offspring is mutated into a species that is unique and cannot reproduce fertile offspring with members of the prior species happens never.
There is no evidence of Macroevolution in the fossil record.
The one-year view of world history seems to those of us older than about twelve to be somewhat short-sighted.
Wikis work if people constantly modify and tune them, and provide content. They don't complete themselves. It sounds like you need trainers, rather than throwing nontechnical people at what is essentially a technical solution.
When did you already tell your boss you'd have this done by?
free rain? (varies by jurisdiction if you actually own the rain that falls on your land).
The Internet has already descended into Anarchy.
That's why we like it. The rules are made by the people who own/run/create/manage it, by mutual agreement, not enforced from the top down. If people don't agree, they go their separate ways, because you can't be forced to allow someone on your network if they violate your network's rules.
The Internet is fine. We like it how it is. No need for more government regulation to ruin it on behalf of those with influence with government officials/politicians/bureaucrats.
So, no studying PtoE, company fundamentals, etc. etc. Further proving that the Stock Market is almost entirely disconnected from the underlying companies. Basically, it's a Ponzi scheme.
This is true mostly for new or trendy companies in trendy spaces. Boring companies that have been around for a long time are often priced based on the future dividends they're expected to pay. They don't get any attention, though, because those that make money on speculating can't make any money by trading them. The speculators and brokers don't want people paying attention to fundamentals. Volumes would plummet so how would they make money? There would be no churn. And then they'd have to sell the million dollar Manhattan apartment where they keep their mistress.
It's similar to the difference between trading Beanie Babies (or whatever faddy collectible is popular now) and something like wheat.
The US government would have invested Social Security in the Stock Market, but they can't find a spokesperson from the financial industry you can advocate the scheme without drooling at the prospect.
The US government already invests that money by spending it and leaving a bond in its place.
And how did they invest it? Well, there are some big craters in Iraq and Afghanistan now. Bingo halls and casinos also seem to have profited.