Monsanto cannabis yes or no? The DNA Protection Act of 2013

[Antidisestablishmentarian]

Exactly what I was thinking about you Frank lol so where are these posts?

The title of the thread is a lie. There is no Monsanto protection act. Every article you post that contains those words, is a lie.

 

[Trousers]

Silly trout, I challenge you to find even one occasion where I have been dishonest...

We can devolve this into a name calling contes, since you are losing the debate.
That is all you have left because you lies have been exposed.

Pretty much everything you have posted has been from a blog. The Natural News has a very clear agenda and the truth is not really important to them. The "studies" you posted are not actual scientific studies.

Here is an example of a lie:

The video reveals where GMOs come from, why they're used and why they cause organ damage and cancer in mammals.

I asked you to reference the study that lie was based on. You still haven't done it. Why? I assume you realize that it is a garbage "study" and not accepted by independent scientists.

If you want to argue semantics by saying, "I wasn't lying, I was just posting a video." You posted a video that is full of lies. You endorse it as truth. That is lying.

You are a liar and a horrible person. I do not understand why you accept blogs and pseudo science as fact and deny the 600 independently funded studies going back 30 some years that say GMO crops are not harmful.

but you cant because I haven't...that leaves you only to do what you do best, lying about others...its all you've got...its all Monsanto's got...

You are obviously unhinged. You post lie after lie as fact. that is lying. You are a terrible person and a liar.

When you asked if I had read the last article, I answered truthfully as I always do, maybe ask yourself why (if i lie) would I not have lied about that?

Posting something you haven't read is just dumb.
You are still posting lies and presenting them as fact. You are a liar and a horrible person.

I know its hard sometimes to try new things, but 'logic' and 'reason' are good words trout, you should try to use them to work this equation out...

The scientific method hates you and the bullshit you post.

Further, information from either side of this 'debate' is biased,

You are not smart enough to understand the difference between a blog and an independently funded, peer reviewed study, much less 600 of them.

you ignorance combined with your willingness to lie and spread lies is crazy. You should be ashamed of yourself. Your parents should have eaten you while your bones were still soft.

therefor I find that such 'info' form both 'sides' is mostly irrelevant to me as I only calculate my position based on the common most basic fundamental facts of life = the numbers...the big mother of all equations...in others words that which you seem to ignore or maybe simply just cannot comprehend?

I haven't ignored anything. You post stuff without reading it.
You can ramble on about how you figure things out, but you are ignoring the best information in favor of blogs and scare tactics.

It is fine if you want to disregard science, but don't spread your garbage lies. I am embarrassed for you and your feeble, lying mind. You are deep in denial.

In any case the point is that (aside from my time constraints) reading that article would have no impact on my position one way or the other,

So why post it? Do you enjoy spreading lies?
Do you enjoy being an ignorant liar?

it might though hold interest for someone else and so I posted it...

Then why didn't you read it? How would you know?
Why do you post lies and present them as fact?

There is also the fact that I am usually also bating a hook for large mouth sweathogs who cant help but bight hard on such...

Troll away. You are a liar and a horrible person. you have no interest in logic, reason and especially critical thinking.
You are unable to hold your own in this debate.

Could you please reference the study that you said shows that GMO crops cause cancer/tumors or what ever you claimed?
I assume you will not, because you know it is a lie.

So, do you want to debate, or do you just want to go ahead and turn this into a name calling contest?
Either way, I will crush you.

Have a great day son.

 

[karousing]

science is wrong though. shit that was concrete gets proven false everyday. science is simply what we are capable of proving using the instruments we have at the time.... think what tools and instruments we will have in 50 years from now... what do you think will still be concrete.....

 

[Trousers]

This is a philosophical argument meant to support an opinion based argument. This has been covered and is irrelevant.
It just does not make any sense. This is what GMO haters rely on.

science is wrong though.

What are you talking about?
What studies do you not agree with?
Why?

shit that was concrete gets proven false everyday.

The best studies and evidence right now say that GMO crops are not harmful.
Until there is better evidence, I will believe the independently funded scientists over a blog and OP-EDs.
Why would you believe opinions over 600 independently funded studies?

science is simply what we are capable of proving using the instruments we have at the time....

Not exactly. Are you talking about the scientific method? You should look that up.

think what tools and instruments we will have in 50 years from now... what do you think will still be concrete.....

Are you arguing against the scientific method?
I would be happy to debate you on that, but it is not really germane to the subject at hand as it is ridiculous.

 

[ginjawarrior]

science is wrong though. shit that was concrete gets proven false everyday. science is simply what we are capable of proving using the instruments we have at the time.... think what tools and instruments we will have in 50 years from now... what do you think will still be concrete.....

Are you suggesting we sit on our hands because we might know more in 50years?

Should we also not sit on our hands in 50years because in 100years from now even more would be known?


We can only act on the information we have at hand

 

[karousing]

you guys are really defensive. i am simply stating a fact.

you can take it to mean whatever you want it to.

and no, i dont think we should sit on our hands.

the only way to make new tools and instruments is to use the ones available at the time until we come across new ones.

you guys really need to look at each statement from a neutral point......

 

[ginjawarrior]

you guys are really defensive. i am simply talking out my arse

Fixed that for you

you can take it to mean whatever you want it to.

Facts mean "what ever you want it to"?

and no, i dont think we should sit on our hands.

the only way to make new tools and instruments is to use the ones available at the time until we come across new ones.

you guys really need to look at each statement from a neutral point......

What exactly was your "neutral point" about "science is wrong"?

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

scientist used to say cigarettes were good for your health, and DDT was safe as well . . your "here is our unquestionable proof that what your opinion and your choice to know what you feed yourself dont matter" reassurance means very little . . only one man thought the earth wasnt round . . . he was killed for it . . . .funny you guys bring up that argument of the more correct theory vs the one with the most government support

yalls view is at best disconcerting and at worst and bad puppet act . . yall knwo as much as us, which is nothing . . independently funded . . .huh . . lol . . .more like indirectly paid for

if GMO is better , market and advertise it . . .as such

 

[ginjawarrior]

scientist used to say cigarettes were good for your health,
and DDT was safe as well

science found them to be unsafe in the end through proper testing and reporting data through proper journals

The moment gmo's are shown to be unsafe in same manner you'd have a point

. . your "here is our unquestionable proof that what your opinion and your choice to know what you feed yourself dont matter" reassurance means very little

You want to eat organic food there's nothing stopping you.

It is labelled properly

. . only one man thought the earth wasnt round . . . he was killed for it

Right.....

. . . .funny you guys bring up that argument of the more correct theory vs the one with the most government support

What?

yalls view is at best disconcerting and at worst and bad puppet act . . yall knwo as much as us, which is nothing . . independently funded . . .huh . . lol . . .more like indirectly paid for

if GMO is better , market and advertise it . . .as such

It is marketed and advertised to the farmers.... as such

By the time it reaches the store it's just food

You want to fool yourself that your eating something better buy organic

 

[Doer]

science is wrong though. shit that was concrete gets proven false everyday. science is simply what we are capable of proving using the instruments we have at the time.... think what tools and instruments we will have in 50 years from now... what do you think will still be concrete.....

Science is neither right or wrong. That is not even covered in the Scientific Method. Science is about attacking, methodically, the Current Understanding. It is all Theory at the top and below the Theory is the Math and below that is the Experiment. After that is tech. Tech works as defined by the Current Understanding.

So, a lot of what is going on with the hippies is attempting to prove something....to be right about something. Not science.

Us actual, trained in method, science types will never say right or wrong except against the assaulted Theory. You get the Theory accepted in the Understanding, like the Higgs field, you will immediately get that turned upon and attacked. By who? The hungry dogs called brilliant Grad Students.
They will jobs from people. Entire fields are disrupted constantly by Experiment. You have to back the right horse to get going in Science. It is dirty business.

Careers rise and fall on this stuff.

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

science found them to be unsafe in the end through proper testing and reporting data through proper journals

The moment gmo's are shown to be unsafe in same manner you'd have a point

possibly poisoning us for a market share of commodities is not ok with me ., . . . and the we just found this out . is not a reasonable excuse to me

so no

my use of the DDT as a point, trumps any caution you throw into the wind

who conducted these independent studies, i missed that page

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

It is marketed and advertised to the farmers.... as such

By the time it reaches the store it's just food

You want to fool yourself that your eating something better buy organic

itsGMO food, and i deserve a right to know . . .bottom line, in a open market if you goign to peddle your whares be ready to accept public backlash when they find out what is actually in them

kinda like MSG

or pink slime

transparency should be easy if your product is safer healthier and more economically and fiscally responsible(as they claim)

do you think we dont need to knwo or shouldn't know or its not important to you so it shouldn't be to me

im trying to Advocate for more transparency your trying to fight for what in regards to not advertising GMO'ed products?

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

who conducted these independant studies that prove all teh glory to the GMO foods, a simple link would suffice . . .

 

[ginjawarrior]

possibly poisoning us for a market share of commodities is not ok with me ., . . . and the we just found this out . is not a reasonable excuse to me

Possibly poisoning?
Absolutely no evidence or even a mechanism for the poisoning to occur?

Cool story bro

my use of the DDT as a point, trumps any caution you throw into the wind

Nonsense it's just hysterical blovating by yourself to hide the fact you have no evidence against gmo

who conducted these independent studies, i missed that page

Scientists

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

DDT, nutra sweet, pringles fat blocker chips(made in teh 90) made you shit yourself all Gov approved untill not

um, your they feed it to us so its safe argument is so easily turned into ky jelly, i dont even know where to start

the ramifications of these products on our society is not known, the FDA feeds us corn by products in every thing, def not good for us and they admit it!

PINK SLIME FDA approved . . . your point is moot in light of what is already on the market, approved by the very entities you that approve all this other shit

im asking for transparency(my personal beliefs are irrelevant) your saying why

and now im wondering why is it you dont care what others are tricked into eating

the percentages dont lie, if we knew it was all GMO(which all corn is and soy and whesat is on its way) people wouldnt eat it

but they dont advertise that, and FDA ORGANIC is a facade

so much of the process is allowed to be not organic its just a giant lie

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

P

Scientists

can you source the study or not . . . .

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

at one time their was no evidence that DDT caused birth defects either

Cigarettes were healthy and promoted by doctors

MSG was thought to be healthy

for fucks sake

pizza is a vegetable now

your they tell us so its right methodology means very little

how many sugar alternatives have been forced on to the market only to be taken off years later for cancer or bith defects risk\

PINK SLIME is MORE THEN edible its been a main stay for probably over 20 years

explain that

 

[ginjawarrior]

itsGMO food, and i deserve a right to know . . .bottom line, in a open market if you goign to peddle your whares be ready to accept public backlash when they find out what is actually in them

kinda like MSG

or pink slime

transparency should be easy if your product is safer healthier and more economically and fiscally responsible(as they claim)

do you think we dont need to knwo or shouldn't know or its not important to you so it shouldn't be to me

im trying to Advocate for more transparency your trying to fight for what in regards to not advertising GMO'ed products?

If you want warning stickers first I suggest you show harm to be warned against. I will not advocate scaring consumers on the whim of woefully misinformed idiots

There is already a labelling system that should guarantee gmo free food

It's called 100% organic

Why is that not good enough for you?

 

[ginjawarrior]

can you source the study or not . . . .

Your asking for the studies that show cigarettes unsafe?

 

[Samwell Seed Well]

If you want warning stickers first I suggest you show harm to be warned against. I will not advocate scaring consumers on the whim of woefully misinformed idiots

There is already a labelling system that should guarantee gmo free food

It's called 100% organic

Why is that not good enough for you?

but its not 100%, they use non organics in teh process . .the qualifications for organic have become less organic as of late so more people can make money

look it up, the FDA organic labeling system is fucked up

scaring misinformed idiots .. . .huh....you say its unequivocally better then the same product . . .. shoudl be easy to prove then huh

but the fact is that its not proven

or the results would be transparent

how long after DDT was used did they know it was bad for you and how long did it take to get it off the shevles

13 years after it as known to be deadly, 23 years after it was thought to be deadly and 40 years after it was created

it was also thoguht to be a break through and it was a farce created by those who made the most money off it



40 years for proper testing, which was observe, as DDT effects are easily seen .. . . . .whats that about scientific method . . . . .should have been obvious . . . huh

when money is at stake, the public's safety seems to always be the last concern