Why not GM?

[ORChick]

Anybody else notice that the OP, after the original post, has only commented twice on this thread? After the thread had languished for a couple of weeks ... as though perhaps to bring it back to the top, and get people excited about the topic again. Kind of wonder if the question was honestly meant, or whether the idea of starting a feud with a hot button topic like GMO was the real thought behind it. Of course, maybe it is just me being skeptical.

Wow. Just because I have a hectic, busy, real life that doesnt allow me to sit on the computer all day, I'm a troll???

Sorry; I apologize. I assumed that, having started a thread, one might follow up on it occasionally. However, I understand that Real Life often does get in the way of other things. Again, I'm sorry if I offended.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I am intimately familiar with the laws regarding organic farming. I have read Agenda 21 and the 5-, 10-, and 20-year updates. It certainly didn't take years to read (good heavens, Agenda 21 is only ~300 pages). Neither the organic farming laws or the UN agenda do anything to prove the danger of GMO crops.

You've got more to read. Simply skimming through just won't do as you will be left without an understanding of what you've read. Each and every program instituted in it's name are parts of it. You can't read it like a comic book or even as a textbook and still see the full scope of its intent. There are other distributions and other CORE publications pertaining to the subversive implementation as well. Publications distributed at local levels of our government as a result of congress not jumping right into bed with it. The global warming lie was a big part of the scheme and it wasn't until the epa had made regulation of the air we exhale and plants breath the law of the land, that the top was allowed to be blown off. I told you earlier, the rabbit hole is a tad bit deeper than you care to peek.

HR875 and S425 were horrible parts of the agenda and were paid for in full by monsanto and cargil.

1. One of your consistent errors is presuming that others have the same difficulties assimilating information that you do. Not all of us do.
2. Nothing you have cited proves that GMO crops are harmful.
3. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. Enjoy your opinion.

What you ignorantly claim is the equivalent to saying you read the constitution so you know all the laws.

 

[DeniseCharleson]

What you ignorantly claim is the equivalent to saying you read the constitution so you know all the laws.

I am far from ignorant in the fields of botany and plant functional genomics. Now, do you have any proof that GMO crops cause harmful effects in humans, or will you just continue to assert that as your opinion?

 

[ThrottleJockey]

What you ignorantly claim is the equivalent to saying you read the constitution so you know all the laws.

I am far from ignorant in the fields of botany and plant functional genomics. Now, do you have any proof that GMO crops cause harmful effects in humans, or will you just continue to assert that as your opinion?

Too bad plants aren't consuming the GM plants, then you might know what your talking about. The last time I checked we were talking about the effects on HUMANS. With such an advanced level of education in the field one would think it would have been a simple task for you to explain the difference between hybrids and GMOs in a way the OP understood the difference...

 

[mrscoyote]

Why is this even being argued? You think GMO's are fine then enjoy them. I for one will not be a statistic when the powers that be go oops.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

The problem is that you WILL be a statistic. There are no products on your grocers shelf that aren't effected and you'll be hard pressed to find any raised/grown locally that aren't either. People like DC seem to think that unnatural substances need to be proven unsafe before we keep them out of our food supply while intelligent people look at it quite the opposite and would prefer they be PROVEN SAFE before we put them and products of them into every item we consume. They take the strawman approach every time and claim there is no proof that they aren't safe, while in fact there is actually no proof that they ARE safe. Big ag lines the pockets of research firms to study them, publishes portions of the studies that were ended before completion, then claims there is no evidence that they cause problems. While no one is paid to study them full term and the negative findings are buried since there is no profit in telling the WHOLE truth, part of the truth will just have to suffice. Whether you believe in creationism, God, evolution or some twisted combination of all of the above, the simple fact remains that these organisms did not get this way on their own. If these franken plants/animals were better the way we made them, they would have found the path there all on their own long ago rather than having specific methods of keeping this from happening ingrained into their code. One last time, within the century we will see a reduction in human population by about 85-90% and the plan for this is written on the web page of those perpetrating it. The food attacks are an optimum method and through them and the reproductive harm they cause, no one will be the wiser and no one will take the fall. So keep arguing that they haven't been proven unsafe and I'll keep arguing that they haven't been proven safe.

 

[baymule]

ThrottleJockey, that was great!! Hero!

 

[moxies_chickennuggets]

I was just reading this thread as I was eating my bowl of Kelloggs Corn Flakes this morning. (I haven't eaten any in many years, just couldn't find the generic on the shelves). I usually don't participate in these discussions, but as I was eating, I realized the cornflakes tasted NOTHING like the others I had been consuming. I researched them. Here is just some of what I found online.

http://www.farmaid.org/site/apps/nl...urce=adwords&gclid=CLj8kbKPwrQCFQq0nQod_DgAww


http://www.naturalnews.com/037315_monsanto_gm_corn_breakfast_cereals.html

http://www.gmolabeling.org/kelloggs-gmo-flakes-activists-take-over-the-kelloggs-facebook-wall/

http://www.banderasnews.com/1012/eden-gmcornmex.htm

http://www.organicconsumers.org/bytes/ob328.htm

I am sure there are many many more sites out there concerning this topic. I had read enough for now. Up until breakfast, I had just watched and listened to the GMO/GE discussions online, in the news, in the forums etc. Not really going full out against them, but trying to see if I can discontinue consuming some of the more prevalent GMO products I might purchase.

As for now, I have almost one full newly opened bag of GMO cornflakes to use up. I will not be feeding them to my chickens. And I will not be buying any more Kelloggs cereals. I will just need to do more research online to see which other products I do purchase are GMO, and proceed to cut back or eliminate them as much as possible.

 

[DeniseCharleson]

What you ignorantly claim is the equivalent to saying you read the constitution so you know all the laws.

I am far from ignorant in the fields of botany and plant functional genomics. Now, do you have any proof that GMO crops cause harmful effects in humans, or will you just continue to assert that as your opinion?

Too bad plants aren't consuming the GM plants, then you might know what your talking about. The last time I checked we were talking about the effects on HUMANS. With such an advanced level of education in the field one would think it would have been a simple task for you to explain the difference between hybrids and GMOs in a way the OP understood the difference...

I have a dual Masters Degree in biology and nursing. I'm pretty familiar with the effects of food on humans. Now, do you have any proof that GMO crops cause harmful effects on humans or are you intent on continuing to rhetorically dance around that question?

 

[~gd]

The problem is that you WILL be a statistic. There are no products on your grocers shelf that aren't effected and you'll be hard pressed to find any raised/grown locally that aren't either. People like DC seem to think that unnatural substances need to be proven unsafe before we keep them out of our food supply while intelligent people look at it quite the opposite and would prefer they be PROVEN SAFE before we put them and products of them into every item we consume. They take the strawman approach every time and claim there is no proof that they aren't safe, while in fact there is actually no proof that they ARE safe. Big ag lines the pockets of research firms to study them, publishes portions of the studies that were ended before completion, then claims there is no evidence that they cause problems. While no one is paid to study them full term and the negative findings are buried since there is no profit in telling the WHOLE truth, part of the truth will just have to suffice. Whether you believe in creationism, God, evolution or some twisted combination of all of the above, the simple fact remains that these organisms did not get this way on their own. If these franken plants/animals were better the way we made them, they would have found the path there all on their own long ago rather than having specific methods of keeping this from happening ingrained into their code. One last time, within the century we will see a reduction in human population by about 85-90% and the plan for this is written on the web page of those perpetrating it. The food attacks are an optimum method and through them and the reproductive harm they cause, no one will be the wiser and no one will take the fall. So keep arguing that they haven't been proven unsafe and I'll keep arguing that they haven't been proven safe.

Only one little problem:IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO PROVE THAT ANYTHING IS TRULY SAFE! so go back to your cave and roll a big rock to block the opening.