Scientists under attack
Ask a question, find a problem, question the process...you're attacked, you're threatened and your career is over...if not your life.
Sounds like the climate warming tactics? If they were on the up and up...why would they resort to gorilla tactics?
They have no idea how it effects us because they've never checked, watched or I suggest...cared.
Are they moral or immoral in their actions in the Ayn Rand world.
Sounds like the climate warming tactics? If they were on the up and up...why would they resort to gorilla tactics?
They have no idea how it effects us because they've never checked, watched or I suggest...cared.
Are they moral or immoral in their actions in the Ayn Rand world.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 3.
She as a gorilla was "Oo! Oo!" jumping up and down excited over what she saw in a crystal ball.
Behind her was a large window filled with a huge air force of flying moneys flapping past.
I interpret this vision to mean that what she has in store for our future is only pretty to her.
Don't worry, folks, I ain't psychic.
I've been called a creative person for years.
Ah, and also a bit off the wall.
Facts are facts period. Theories are not facts and a hypothesis is not a fact.
The problem is that people pawn off theories as fact, opinion as fact.
These things are no different that the discussions between Atheists, and Deists.
Neither can argue their point with provable repeatable empirical fact, only reason on their theories and "beliefs."
Atheists and Deists always find themselves at a stalemate but need to respect each others view for lack of fact.
To violently attack each other's theory and opinion based view is "immoral" only because 100% provable fact is not available.
In the anti GM food tactics, so called powerful companies who represent the mass of consumers try to destroy the careers of a few whistle blowers. So in the first case a small group of climate change artists try to destroy a larger group which sees no problem while in the second case a larger group of so called GM food users who see no problem are trying to destroy the smaller group of whistle blowers. In both cases the smaller group of whiners use career destroying tactics.
Remember that it is the dosage that makes the poison. In feeding studies, usually there is an extreme difference than in how a product would be used by a consumer. As for humans being used as test animals, all animals, including humans, in the wild are constantly subjecting themselves to new chemicals in foods just from mutations and cross breeding of plants. Nothing alive stays biologically the same for a life time.
I wouldn't worry about GM food, I get enough health issues just for being about 30 lbs overweight and short of starving myself find weight lose to be a problem, where it is not worth the time to run an obstacle course get the just right natural types of food. Unless you go out into an untouched wilderness and gather your food, there is no such thing as untainted healthy food. Worry about it is most likely more detrimental than just eating available food. Besides, if you do not like eating too many insects then there may be fewer insect parts milled into your cereal with the GM versions and far fewer than if you revert to the ancient hunter-gatherer methods. That is, if you eat cereals since there are those who believe that humans are not meant to eat grass type seeds.
The Fact that they are trying to deny our "Free Choice" makes one wonder...it's justified to wonder and ask questions and check it out yourself.
I do agree that there are wacko's on both sides but I think there are more wacko's on the monsanto side to be honest.
They were only trying to get rid of weeds and enable the plants to grow closer to each other. I hear there are better more natural methods to do that but never got around to vetting that out.
The problem is, they have no idea what the long time human health effects are; not to mention that the weeds have adapted and grow anyway and the genetic mutations have effected nature itself...they have not acted ethically:
If you get the chance read. Altered Genes/Twisted Truth, it is very detailed, from day one and backed up by tractor trailer loads of evidence.
All conspiracies aside...we should be allowed to ask questions and get honest answers because it's not nice to fool mother nature nor one's conscious human counterparts.
Down the street from me, by the ocean (long Island Sound), there is a summer home built on an old steel barge platform...during high water events...the whole thing floats!
Without GMOs how many people in today's world would be starving? I disagree with stifling free speech as much as I question the fear-mongering. If science can genetically engineer DNA for the worse, it could also re-engineer those found to have adverse problems and make adjustments. No?
Respectfully,
O.A.
Remember when she barked during a speech?
Now imagine her jumping up and down in front of a microphone.
"Oo! Oo! Oo!"
Ignoring the cycles of climate is really dumb...unless you have an agenda to do harm.
Now I could insult gorillas by equating libtard antics to "gorilla guerilla tactics" but I won't.
Now I feel inspired to write "librtard hydrophobic wild chimpanzee guerilla tactics" but I won't insult chimps either.
Afraid old dino has always been hard on primates.
Back when I was a kid, "See ya later, alligator" was a popular thing to day.
So I just had to come up with the follow-up of "But not too soon, you big baboon."
That got a couple of laughs. Well, sometimes. Sigh.
I better go.
That quote and a too large fraction of the comments I read recently in this forum, sound to me devoid of rationality, in addition to very numerous cases of careless writing. The latter I interpret as an expression of a passionate drive to express what I see as a fear of reason and, ultimately, of the facts in existing reality.
Thanks again.
Load more comments...