Another GMO Whore Heard From (Re-Post from GMO Answers)

It just doesn't end.


Before I put up the Richie Allen video featuring Professor Seneff, there was a YouTube commenter by the name of dsndicmsa, who I'm hoping isn't getting paid to shill for Monsanto (pssst...you're not getting your money's worth). The commenter engaged in much bashing of Stephanie, and I decided to refute a number of proffered statements by said commenter. As a newer user of Google Plus, I was unaware of comment duplication, so you may see multiple responses to comments. I'm learning something new every day.


I found this piece of fish wrapping by Steve Savage: 


Steve Savage Addresses Samsel and Seneff study, “Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases II: Celiac sprue and gluten intolerance”

By Steve Savage (Independent Expert) on Friday, March 14, 2014 - 15:14

Category: Impact on Environment, Safety, Health, and Nutrition, Science and GMO Basics

In a recent literature survey published by Samsel and Seneff, an argument is made for a possible link between the incidence of celiac disease in the United States and the use of the herbicide glyphosate.

A key element of the authors’ argument is based on a single example of a study with fish (Senapati et al., 2009). In that study, adverse effects were observed in fish that were exposed to water containing a glyphosate-based herbicide. Samsel and Seneff concluded that the effects observed in the fish were "highly reminiscent of celiac disease." The Senapati fish paper is itself deeply flawed, but it is also irrelevant.

Senapati et al. exposed fish in tanks to a glyphosate rate of 4mg/L, added as a commercial formulation manufactured in India, called Excel Mera-71. That is a formulation made for terrestrial, not aquatic, use, and it is described as containing glyphosate and "a blend of non-ionic and cationic surfactants." At least in the United States, products registered for use on emerged weeds growing in water do not contain surfactants, because they are known to injure fish. The 4mg/L concentration used in the Senapati study was also more than twice as high as the highest rate allowed for a legitimate aquatic formulation, AquaMaster, in the United States. In addition, the water in which the fish were kept was replaced every other day for 45 days with a fresh supply of the surfactant-containing herbicide—not something relevant to any real-world situation. There was no surfactant control in this study, even though surfactants are well known for being able to cause injury to the gills and digestive tracks of fish. The Senapati study simply redocumented the fact that long-term, high-rate exposure of fish to surfactants is damaging, while glyphosate and its primary metabolite, AMPA, are classified as "practically non-toxic" to fish by the EPA.

There is no pattern of potential glyphosate exposure for humans in the United States that is even remotely like that in this poorly designed fish study. The formulation surfactants would not be present in human foods, the rates of glyphosate would be orders of magnitude lower and they would be in the form of the metabolite AMPA. 

The Senapati study simply provides no meaningful data that Samsel and Seneff can use to connect glyphosate and celiac incidence.

Independent Expert

Steve Savage

Consultant, Savage & Associates

Steve Savage has more than 30 years of experience in agricultural technology having worked in academics (Colorado State University), at a global research company (DuPont), at a biotechnology start-up (Mycogen), and for the last 16 years as a consultant. Over the years, his research and consulting topics have ranged from biological control to crop protection chemicals (synthetic and natural product based); traits based on advances from traditional genetics to biotechnology; and crops from grains to specialty fruits and vegetables. He has also worked extensively on bio-fuels, fertilizers and on footprints of farming (carbon, water, energy and land-use).

As I stated...fish wrapping. Luca Brasi himself approves this.

Whenever I read a phrase that goes, "classified as "practically non-toxic" to fish by the EPA", I say to myself...YOU DIDN'T PERFORM ANY BLOODY STUDY AT ALL, DID YOU?

I was listening to Dr. Ted Broer this morning, and he echoes the sentiments of this study - that it isn't intolerance to gluten that we are all experiencing all of a sudden; rather, it's the recent application of glyphosate as a dessicant to increase crop yields.

I find this utterly unnecessary, considering the amounts of food that are being discarded daily; in fact, there was a ridiculous story about a green grocer who had their food too far out on the sidewalk, so city workers were THROWING IT AWAY.

Probably right in front of starving people.

WHAT

THE

HELL?!?

Then there's a throw-away reference to "real-world" situations...as if in the real world, pollution doesn't stay on one place, it migrates, like the homeless guy who manages to freshly defecate on your wall, just as you're coming home with fresh baked goods.

In the study, they kept the level of pollution constant; in the real world, the level of pollution will get WORSE. I thought the study was exceedingly kind, considering.

Just to finish this with the proper bit of zing...he's a hell of an "independent expert", considering his ties to a number of biotech firms. Sort of like Colonel Sanders being an independent expert on chicken.

MIT Professor Stephanie Seneff: "I Have Evidence That Monsanto's Roundup Causing Cancer!"

Hopefully, that works - enjoy!

How Organisms Work (The Demise of the Arctic Apple)

I was listening to Dr. Ted Broer's podcast last night (the previous night, his guest was Jon Rappoport, who discussed the Zika virus not being the cause of microcephaly; rather, it was the result of the TDAP vaccine given around the same time that the epidemic became known, among other subjects). He and his son, Austin, mentioned that the B.C. Fruit Growers Association is resolving to block sales of the recently approved Arctic Apple (featured on Doctor Oz's show):


KELOWNA – The B.C. Fruit Growers’ Association doesn’t want to see the genetically modified Arctic apple on grocery store shelves in Canada.


The group passed a resolution at its annual general meeting in Kelowna to ask the Canadian government to de-register the product.


The Arctic apple doesn’t turn brown, because the gene responsible for producing the enzyme that causes browning has been switched off.

It was deregulated in the U.S. in February 2015 and approved by Health Canada shortly afterwards, giving the green light for the sale of the apple in both countries.

What the article does not mention, however, is the reason for wanting to take the product off of shelves. The reason is that, in turning off the enzyme that turns the fruit brown after exposure to air, in turn, turns off the natural defenses the fruit has to pests. That necessitates that the fruit must then be sprayed with pesticides.

A living being is an amazing thing, but underneath the exterior, there is a delicate balance occurring. Processes to enable life are tied into other processes, and not necessarily in a determinable way. The story of the Arctic Apple is a fine example of said balance.

I am a new listener of Ted's program, and his advice, as well as one of his products, has allowed me to see the first signs of actual healing after nearly four years since I had an accident which robbed me of a normal life, as well as my family. I look forward to using more of Ted's products; Doug Hagmann of the Hagmann & Hagmann Report was brought back from the brink of having to live with the vagaries of diabetic complications.

I wholly recommend that you check out his product line - maybe you can benefit.

How To Bitch-Slap A Moron

I posted at the end of yesterday's blog posting that I would be defending the honor of Professor Stephanie Seneff because of a remark made on a Facebook posting by an ex-classmate (Yes, I do realize the irony of defending someone, yet having the word "bitch" in the title).

 

This took place on a public page, so I feel comfortable in reposting this here, in its entirety. The only changes made were to protect the stupid (and my fellow classmates who aren't tight-assed martinets). I will note my new comments post-"debate" with brackets and italicizes text; otherwise, this is virtually the exact posting. The comments, however, are not linear. I can't really do anything about that at the moment, but if enough of you want to see the posting with the nestling as it appeared, I'm willing to offer the link.

 

Of course, Professor Seneff has absolutely nothing at all to do with this. I invoked her name, due to her positing that glyphosate has a relationship in causing autism. You will see that at one point, he pretends to be posting his own beliefs, but the breaks in the texts would indicate that he was obtaining talking points from elsewhere. Any new commentary (to be separated with brackets and the aforementioned italicized text) will serve only to highlight such moments...and so, without further ado, enjoy, dear readers:

 

Vincent Nunes
The Science Guy sold his soul to Monsanto.
January 31 at 11:18pm
Was Bill Nye Paid by Monsanto to Change His Mind on
GMOs?
On Neil DeGrasse Tyson's radio show StarTalk, Bill Nye the Science Guy answers
his fans' burning questions about his GMO flip-flop and if Monsanto paid him to
ECOWATCH.COM
Like Comment Share
Ex-Classmate #1 likes this.
Clueless Moron C'mon, Vince, quit with the delusional conspiracy theories. Come back to the real world. You were here once. We had fun.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · January 31 at 11:20pm
Vincent Nunes We can agree to disagree. I don't want FrankenFoods... you enjoy.
I don't suffer from delusions. I've done the research. I've been in email correspondence with Professor Stephanie Seneff from MIT. Call her delusional, if you dare.
Like · Reply · January 31 at 11:41pm
Hide 18 Replies
Clueless Moron Easily. She's delusional. She's also a computer scientist who has used completely nonsensical methods to claim that vaccines cause autism, glyphosate causes cancer, and who knows what else. She's a nutjob. A complete whackadoodle.
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 1:36am
Vincent Nunes Can I quote you?
Like · Reply · Yesterday at 8:27pm
Clueless Moron As long as you don't send your nutjob friends after me, sure.
Like · Reply · 23 hrs
Vincent Nunes Ah, the name calling. I don't do that. Some of my nutjob friends are yours, as well.
Like · Reply · 23 hrs
Vincent Nunes I got one for you. Would you drink 8 ounces of Roundup?
Like · Reply · 23 hrs
Clueless Moron Would you drink 8 ounces of Neem Oil? If I was forced to drink one of those pesticides , I'd choose Roundup. Every time.
Like · Reply · 23 hrs
Ex-Classmate #2 Group hug anyone?
Unlike · Reply · 2 · 23 hrs
Vincent Nunes Trad itional Ayurvedic uses of neem include the
treatment of acne, fever, leprosy, malaria, ophthalmia and
tuberculosis. Various folk remedies for neem include use as an
anthelmintic, antifeedant, antiseptic, diuretic, emmenagogue,
contraceptive, febrifuge, parasiticide, pediculocide and insecticide. It
has been used in traditional medicine for the treatment of tetanus,
urticaria, eczema, scrofula and erysipelas. Traditional routes of
administration of neem extracts included oral, vaginal and topical use.
Neem oil has an extensive history of human use in India and
surrounding regions for a variety of therapeutic purposes. Puri (1999)
has given an account of traditional uses and therapeutic indications
and pharmacological studies of this oil, in his book on neem.[3]
Formulations made of neem oil also find wide usage as a biopesticide
for organic farming, as it repels a wide variety of pests including the
mealy bug, beet armyworm, aphids, the cabbage worm, thrips,
whiteflies, mites, fungus gnats, beetles, moth larvae, mushroom flies,
leafminers, caterpillars, locust, nematodes and the Japanese beetle.
Neem oil is not known to be harmful to mammals, birds, earthworms
or some beneficial insects such as butterflies, honeybees and
ladybirds (ladybugs in US English) if it is not concentrated directly into
their area of habitat or on their food source. It can be used as a
household pesticide for ant, bedbug, cockroach, housefly, sand fly,
snail, termite and mosquitoes both as repellent and larvicide.[3]
Neem oil also controls black spot, powdery mildew, anthracnose and
rust fungi.
Neem seed oil has also been found to prevent implantation and may
even have an abortifacient effect similar to pennyroyal, juniper
berries, wild ginger, myrrh and angelica. The effects were seen as
many as ten days after fertilization in rats though it was most effective
at no more than three days. (Sinha, et al., 1984)[not specific enough
to verify]; (Lal et al., 1985)[not specific enough to verify]. In a study
on rats, neem oil was given orally eight to ten days after implantation
of the fetus on the uterine wall. In all cases, by day 15, the embryos
were all completely resorbed by the body. The animals regained
fertility on the next cycle showing no physical problems. Detailed
study of the rats revealed increased levels of gamma interferon in the
uterus. The neem oil enhanced the local immune response in the
uterus.(Mukherjee, 1996)[4][not specific enough to verify] Post coital
use of neem oil as birth control does not appear to work by hormonal
changes but produces changes in the organs that make pregnancy
no longer viable (Tewari, 1989)[not specific enough to verify]
(Bardham, 1991)[not specific enough to verify].
Neem seed oil has also been used as a renewable source for the
preparation of polymeric coatings. It has been converted into various
polymeric resins, including polyesteramides and polyetheramides.
These resins may be utilized further for preparation of polyurethane
coatings.[5][6][7]
In the UK, pesticides that contain Azadirachtin and/or neem oil are
banned. [8]
Toxicity[edit]
Studies done when Azadirachtin (the primary active pesticidal
ingredient in neem oil) was approved as a pesticide, showed that
when neem leaves were fed to male albino rats for 11 weeks, 100%
(reversible) infertility resulted.[9]
Neem oil and other neem products, such as neem leaves and neem
tea, should not be consumed by pregnant women, women trying to
conceive, or children.[10]
There is some evidence that internal medicinal use of neem oil, may
be associated with liver damage in children.[11
Like · Reply · 16 hrs
Vincent Nunes Clueless Moron, I would appreciate if you didn't send any of your maniacs. Thanks.
Like · Reply · 16 hrs
Clueless Moron Sorry, but the copy/paste from Wikipedia doesn't really say anything related to the topic at hand. Would you be willing to
drink 8 ounces of Neem Oil? If it'll help, I can tell you that your answer should be "no". Neem Oil, like many other pesticides approved for organic farming, is more toxic to humans than Roundup. Remember kids, it's all about the dose. And as to my "maniacs", my "side" on this debate has not had a history of threats, scare tactics, and destruction of property (I don't know as to what he is referring to here...I am my own person, and to the best of my recollection, I do not ever recall ever threatening anyone from the outset, attempting scare tactics or destroying any property). But, Vince, this is obviously going nowhere. We've been down this path and you've been constantly unwilling to listen to reason, instead resorting to posting links to crackpot web sites at which any competent scientist rolls their eyes. I think we've annoyed our fellow classmates enough with this pointless back and forth. How about we call this not "agree to disagree", but "agree that you really need to stop getting your information from conspiracy theorists, crackpots, and all around loony bins"? No? Ah well, it was worth a try. Let's just call it over and done with.
Like · Reply · 12 hrs
Vincent Nunes (Sigh) What I did was to research Neem oil, since I hadn't yet heard of it. I posted some of that info here to save others some time, and to disprove your utterly assholish assertion that I
don't consider alternate viewpoints. Everyone here knows that's not how I work... everyone but you.
YOU are the intolerant one here.
Don't refer to anything I post as "conspiracy theory" again. Everything I post has been researched. I guarantee history will put me in a better light than you.
Of course my answer is no, in response to ingesting pesticide.
What a dick.
Who in their right bloody mind would do such a thing? My point was to point out the inherent danger of ingesting it AT ANY LEVEL.
When did you become a stick up your own ass?
Anyway, Happy Groundhog Day!
Like · Reply · 2 hrs
Clueless Moron Vince, I've read what you posted before. Almost everything that I've seen you post has been some conspiracy theory or another. Do you still think that Sandy Hook was a false flag operation? I can't remember if you were one of those people that believe that nobody actually died there or not, but I remember you claiming some ridiculous conspiracy related to that. And you're still a 9/11 truther, no? And you still think that vaccines cause autism or other medical problems (outside of known possible side effects, of course - CM's comment, not mine). Vince, if you sincerely believe what you post, then you seem to live your life around believing things that are completely contrary to the evidence. So, no history will not put you in a better light.
You were the one who started on the suggestions to drink pesticides, not me. I merely countered your query with one of my own. And everything is safe to ingest at a small enough level. For glyphosate,
that level is higher than things as innocuous as table salt.
(Talk about posting stupid crap)
And yes, I have little tolerance for nutjobs who see conspiracies everywhere. They're some of the people who are holding our society back. I'd ask you when you started believing any claims coming from random mental patients with an internet connection.
(Imagine my level of tolerance for idiots, then)
Like · Reply · 2 hrs
Vincent Nunes I tried to sink the U.S.S. Liberty, too...don't forget.
(The Titanic isn't the only accident in the world)
Like · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs
Ex-Classmate #4This obviously boils down to male albino rat privilege. If neither of you can see this, it's because you have been brainwashed by corporate rat interests.
Keep your feet off the glue traps.
(This was a funny aside regarding "white privilege", just in case it doesn't quite at first correlate to the discussion at hand)
Unlike · Reply · 2 · 1 hr
Ex-Classmate #2 Group hug offer is still on the table....
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes At this point, it might need to be a reach-around.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Ex-Classmate #2 Better bring out the gimp, gimp's asleep...
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes Zed...wakey, wakey!
Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
(The above two comments are in reference to Pulp Fiction...but I'm fairly certain I didn't really need to tell you that)
Ex-Classmate #3 Well Bill is in favor of labelling. Why not?
Unlike · Reply · 1 · Yesterday at 12:30am
Vincent Nunes replied · 1 Reply
Vincent Nunes http://www.realfarmacy.com/monsanto-history/
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 16 hrs
The Secret History of Monsanto You Were
Never Told
REALFARMACY.COM | BY REALFARMACY.COM
Vincent Nunes And just to really bust balls:
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/.../zika-monsantos.../
Like · Reply · Remove Preview · 2 hrs
Zika? Monsanto’s Roundup associated
with smaller heads
JONRAPPOPORT.WORDPRESS.COM
Ex-Classmate #1 Anyone who doesn't see how evil a company Monsanto is, is blind to the truth. Look at their company leaders and board. It is a revolving door of politicians. They are out to destroy the private farmers and control all farming. I love how their crop spread to one farmers land and then they sued him when it cross contaminated his crop and produced their crop. It's pathetic.
Vince, I agree with you, I don't want frankenfood. And Bill Bye has always been kind of a douche in my opinion, so it is no surprise he has been bought.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs
Hide 16 Replies
Vincent Nunes Percy Schmeiser, to be precise. I have data on crop yields that didn't live up to projections. Dr. Seralini was vindicated in his rat analyses. I'll leave it there for now.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Ex-Classmate #1 You know how you can tell something is evil or wrong, when both sides of the fence politically can march together against it. I have been to rallies where both republican and democrat, conservative and liberal came together to protest against Monsanto.
(Side note, have you ever watched the show Continuum? They slam them with a company they have named Sonmanto. - Ex-C#1's comment)
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Clueless Moron Oh good lord, more crap. Schmeiser intentionally broke the law (whether or not you think the law is just, that's irrelevant) by specifically planting RoundupReady seed without a license. So, yes,
Monsanto sued a farmer. Because he violated their patent knowingly. It's happened thousands of times around the world. And yet Monsanto is the evil one.
And Seralini was absolutely NOT vindicated in his rat experiment. It was a farce of a study done on rats predisposed to cancer. And then Seralini specifically let the rats develop large painful tumors , which is
cruel and against standard study protocol.
(I guess that's less cruel than simply killing them after 90 days, therefore serving absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Why perform the experiment at all, if one is simply going to attempt to posit that nothing untoward will occur from ingesting GMO foods, when insufficient time has elapsed to actually verify said claim? In addition to this...Seralini LET THE RATS DEVELOP LARGE PAINFUL TUMORS?!? He can do that?!? Why wouldn't he do the same to his tormentors?!?)
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Ex-Classmate #1 I just love to hear a lackey rant.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Clueless Moron In what way am I a lackey? Are you going to employ the shill gambit now? That's what all anti-science folks resort to when they have no valid arguments (Pot, please meet kettle). If someone actually accepts the thousands of studies (both independent and not) of any of the topic that have been mentioned here, they must be paid to voice that opinion (My checks must be made of those pink superballs).
Ex-Classmate#1, I don't have as much experience with your posts as I do Vince, but so far, you're just rehashing tired old anti-GMO/anti-science rhetoric that's been debunked time and time again.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Ex-Classmate #1 Anti-Science? So if I believe in science that shows the harmful effects of GMO's, then I am a nut-job and anti-science to you? Interesting. I suppose then that only the reports you believe are valid? I find it interesting that you are so pro-Monsanto and seem to be "educated" in these various cases. I always find it interesting when someone walks lock-step with a corporation. I then wonder what their agenda is.
But what do I know huh? I'm apparently anti-science and therefore some nut-job.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes "Anti-Science"...that's rich.
Regarding Percy: It all began in 1998, at which time Schmeiser had grown canola on his farm for 40 years. Like any other traditional farmer, he used his own seeds, saved from the previous harvest. But, like hundreds of other North American farmers, Schmeiser ended up being sued by Monsanto for 'patent infringement.'
More than 320 hectares were found to be contaminated with Roundup Ready canola—the biotech giant's patented canola, genetically engineered to tolerate otherwise lethal doses of glyphosate. The company sought damages totaling $400,000.
Most farmers end up settling, but Schmeiser was angry enough to fight back. In a 1999 interview, Schmeiser stated:
"I never put those plants on my land. The question is, where do Monsanto's rights end and mine begin?"
The case eventually went before the Federal Court of Canada.
Schmeiser in turn accused Monsanto of:

• Libel, by publicly accusing him of committing illegal acts
• Trespassing
• Improperly obtaining samples of his seed from a local seed plant
• Callous disregard for the environment by introducing genetically
modified crops without proper controls and containment
• Contamination of his crops with unwanted GM plants

He never planted their damn seeds; the pollen drifted onto his crops  and mixed in. The genetic signature came up in his heretofore virgin crops. There's nothing "anti-science" about speaking the truth.
Seralini - now, "anti-science" is testing something for 90 days and then stating that there isn't a need to test further, then killing the rats before they could exhibit any damage to their organs. He simply went beyond the 90 day period.
By the way, it's obvious you're getting your talking points from some stupid-ass pro-FrankenFood crapfest, so hopefully you're done hoisting upon your petard.
Like · Reply · 1 · 1 hr
Clueless Moron  The vast majority of scientific studies and scientists around the world have shown/believe that GMOs are safe.
If you want to believe the very small number of studies/scientists that don't, then yeah, that's anti-science.
I am not pro-Monsanto. I object to many things that they do, but I also see the hypocrisy in folks who call them the devil and yet completely ignore the same behavior in other companies and exaggerate their actions to the point of ridiculousness. I am in no way, shape, or form, in lock-step with any corporation or organization.
(What the hell is he talking about here?!? They should get a pass because some other companies engaged in like behavior doesn't get their feet held to the fire...IN HIS ESTIMATION?!? You will see later that I call him out on his bullshite; this is what Michael Shermer refers to as the "jumping around" argument. It is commonly used when the facts are no longer on your side)
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Clueless Moron Vince, that is most definitely not the story of Schmeiser.
He intentionally and knowingly planted RoundupReady crops. He specifically broke the law.
(LIE!!!)
No, he didn't start the process by planting the initial seeds that "contaminated" his crops (for which Monsanto has never sued), but he sure as hell took advantage of it.
(Yeah...that really worked out well for him, didn't it?)
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes So this was a hallucination of mine?
"After a decade-long battle, Schmeiser won when, in March 2008, Monsanto settled out of court, agreeing to pay for all cleanup costs.
The agreement also specified that Schmeiser would not be under gag-order, and that Monsanto can be sued for recontamination.
This was a much-needed win not just for Schmeiser, but for farmers everywhere. It set the precedence that farmers may be entitled to reimbursement when their fields are contaminated with unwanted GM crops (as indeed they should!)."
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes You know, I'm actually trying to watch Thor: The Dark World. Just admit that you have NOTHING. I've an answer for any GMO hot garbage you try to foist upon us here.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Clueless Moron I don't know what claim you're making about the "hallucination" bit, but yes, Monsanto paid the $660 in cleanup costs from a small claims court settlement (I actually oppose what Monsanto did - making paying for contamination cleanup contingent on a confidentiality agreement) . And before that, Schmeiser had to pay almost $20k in licensing costs and hundreds of thousands in legal fees for losing the lawsuit Monsanto brought against him. This set no precedent. Monsanto already had a program in place to pay for cleanup costs involved in crop contamination. What the small claims court ruling did was kick them in the ass and remind them that requiring a confidentiality agreement is a douchebag move.
(The gymnastics he's attempting to perform here are dizzying)
And you haven't said anything that hasn't been either a copy and paste from a quack site like Mercola, an exaggeration, a lie of omission, or an outright untruth . Actually, those last three pretty much cover everything in the first item.
(Like many of his ilk, he mentions "Mercola" , as if simply by dint of invoking his name, everything that I've stated is utterly without merit...much as if Adolf Hitler mentioning that grass is green invalidates grass being colored green. I also wanted to note that, right here, he admits that my point is NOT MADE UP OUT OF WHOLE CLOTH, but that he "opposes" Monsanto having paid to clean up Schmeiser's farm after he proved that it was indeed pollen drift, and nothing at all to do with him actually planting any Monsanto seeds whatsoever. This is where I beging to throw in my not-so-kind commentary)
Like · Reply · 54 mins
Vincent Nunes Monsanto really appreciates your concern, but they told to tell you to kiss their chapped ass just a little harder. You keep missing the chocolate starfish
You mention Mercola like that in of itself should invalidate anything I should say. That's anti-science. Nothing from you about superweeds, I see.
In the beginning, I posited that we should agree to disagree, but apparently, you need to enforce your worldview upon mine, and I don't take too kindly to that* (*fixed sp). It really has never ended well for anyone who has tried.
Like · Reply · 45 mins
Clueless Moron No, I'm refuting your falsehoods with facts backed by the majority of studies and scientists. That is no worldview.
However, I do think it may be time to agree to part ways. You're still as unwilling to listen to reason as ever and I'm obviously not going to change your mind. Besides, I'm sure the majority of our classmates couldn't give two whits about this discussion.
Like · Reply · 10 mins
Vincent Nunes Thanks...now I can finish watching what's left of Thor: TDW.
And remember...this was all your doing.
Buh bye.
(You can't tell because the nestling of the comments was removed when I saved this dialogue, but this was the actual end of the posting - I'm pleased to report that their hasn't yet been any further response on the matter)
Like · Reply · 3 mins
Ex-Classmate #2 I'm thoroughly enjoying this.
Like · Reply · 1 min
Write a reply...
Ex-Classmate #3 Or fooled? But as I said, he supports labeling.
Unlike · Reply · 1 · 2 hrs
Vincent Nunes By the way, I think it's worth mentioning the former nature of these biotechs - for example, BASF is in the GMO business. Remember what they used to do?
They made videotapes.
I'll trust a farmer over them any day.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Clueless Moron Funny, the majority of farmers support using GMOs and using Roundup and other synthetic pesticides. Do you trust the majority of farmers?
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Vincent Nunes Those farmers are regretting their choice to go along with the hype. Do you know how many Indian farmers committed suicide because their crops failed?
THEY drank the pesticide so that their families could live on.
But thanks for engaging in a logical fallacy for all to see. Michael Shermer came up with the term, and then was caught employing it at every turn.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Clueless Moron Christ on a crutch. And here we are with the Indian farmer suicide lie. You REALLY need to stop buying everything that Mercola and others like him are feeding you.
That Indian farmer suicide lie was dreamed up by noted anti-GMO speaker Vandana Shiva. Since I'm just too damned tired to refute all your lies, I'm just going to post this: http://issues.org/30-2/keith/
Like · Reply · 50 mins
(Here, he insists that the Indian farmer suicide is a MYTH)
Vincent Nunes In response, from your article: "As Mr. Blake alludes to here, the more important issue is not GM crops per se but the aggregate affect of ignoring soil health. Natural system based agricultural techniques such as Agroforestry and agroecology, which fundamentally focus on building healthy soil, are the answer to
sustainable food production. Corporate controlled, industrial agriculture, which is mentioned repeatedly but not problematized, is what drives soil degradation whether or not GM crops are the culprit.
Effective policies would look at the Indian suicides systemically, offering programs, services, and market incentives that encourage stewardship of the soil. In this situation, Monsanto’s primary concern is not to feed the world, but to maximize profits. This is why the seeds are patented, and this is why, beyond Monsanto, the ecosystem for financing agriculture is designed for extracting money from rural Indian farmers, as opposed to allowing them to take the necessary time for nurturing soil health. Addressing this issue over the long term will require providing viable pathways to land and soil stewardship and, ultimately, empowerment of the rural Indian farmer. This is what Vandana Shiva and other like-minded activists are actually interested in solving but which the government and scientific community at large is incapable of acknowledging.
Healthy soil = healthy food = healthy societies = healthy economies."
Like · Reply · 19 mins
Vincent Nunes All I have to offer is LIES?!?
Please go eat some waterhead salmon.
(In reference to the approval of AquaBounty GMO salmon for sale to the general public - they are generally twice as large as the natural variety)
Like · Reply · 17 mins
Vincent Nunes And can you mention "Mercola" another thousand
times? Geez.
(Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nutcase," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," and, of course, "rumor monger." Be sure, too, to use heavily loaded verbs and adjectives when characterizing their charges and defending the "more reasonable" government and its defenders. You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned. For insurance, set up your own "skeptics" to shoot down. This is number 5 in David Martin's Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression)
Like · Reply · 16 mins
Clueless Moron As soon as you stop posting slabs of crap from his site or other sites just like his.
Like · Reply · 8 mins
Vincent Nunes And it's your goddamned business exactly how?
(What I should have written here was


YOU


ARE


NOT


THE


BOSS


OF


ME)
Like · Reply · 6 mins
Vincent Nunes Did he slap you in the mouth or something?
Like · Reply · 5 mins
Write a reply...
Vincent Nunes Also...you've not heard of superweeds, I guess? Weeds that adapted to Roundup, and now grow so hardily that they break farming equipment.
A little hard work never hurt anyone.
Like · Reply · 59 mins
Clueless Moron And you've never heard of natural (or unnatural) selection? ANY process that kills a specific group of a species will select for members outside of that group. Organic pesticides select for "superweeds". So does the process of farming. There is no evidence that Roundup has any greater likelihood of creating "superweeds" than pretty much any other pesticide.
Like · Reply · 48 mins
Vincent Nunes Yeah...except that weeds never adapted to that level pre-Roundup.
That was pretty desperate. Can I go back to Thor?

 

And that was it.

 

I'm hoping that Thor: The Dark World will be re-broadcast this weekend, and maybe I can watch it without interruption. I met Stan "The Man" Lee, and it just tickles me whenever I see him in his various cameos with Marvel's film productions.


I figured that this would be a whole lot more entertaining to you all than another bloodlessly boring lecture...and I didn't even get to mention the terminator genes in Monsanto's seeds!


I'm hoping for some feedback.