If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Snopes)   Yeah, that whole "Putin mad at U.S. for siding with company responsible for eradication of bees" thing was made up by a nutjob anti-GMO conspiracy theorist   (snopes.com) divider line 68
    More: Followup, gmos, Putin, U.S., Monsanto, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russia, obama, Ministry of Natural Resources  
•       •       •

781 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 May 2013 at 9:09 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



68 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-31 09:12:02 AM
Russia was never very concerned about workers.
 
2013-05-31 09:12:10 AM
Anyone who attempts to take control of the whole worlds agriculture is inherently evil.  GMO's is just how Monsanto is trying (and succeeding).
 
2013-05-31 09:14:12 AM
Man, I didn't even know that Putin was mad at the U.S. for siding with the company responsible for the eradication of bees. I feel so out of the loop.
 
2013-05-31 09:18:19 AM
Factory farm hate goes in cycles. This time the only difference is you have millions of foodies joining them because having even a small amount of mass produced food product on their plate ruins the integrity of their Instagram photo.
 
2013-05-31 09:24:40 AM
Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.
 
2013-05-31 09:26:22 AM

phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.


Has any of their food made anyone ill?
 
2013-05-31 09:26:58 AM
static.guim.co.uk
 
2013-05-31 09:28:38 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.

Has any of their food made anyone ill?


It has made a lot of people poor
 
2013-05-31 09:29:27 AM
No one should be able to patent the raw mechanics of life.  Unfortunately, this gets conflated with unfounded nonsense about the dangers of GMOs
 
2013-05-31 09:31:38 AM
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-31 09:34:31 AM

DarnoKonrad: No one should be able to patent the raw mechanics of life.  Unfortunately, this gets conflated with unfounded nonsense about the dangers of GMOs


The court ruling was very limited to specifics of the case and was a lose-win for copyright reformers.
 
2013-05-31 09:37:24 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.

Has any of their food made anyone ill?


What is being done to our food supply isn't necessarily going to make anyone ill right now...the problem is that it will make us ill over the rest of our shortened lifetimes...
 
2013-05-31 09:40:47 AM
Whether it causes illness or shortened lifetimes requires scientific proof, not frightened assertions based on watching The Thing.
 
2013-05-31 09:44:09 AM
The genetically modified food is currently designed to only cause cancer and birth defects generally in people and races we don't like: generally people too poor to buy Roundup™.

In the future, GMO can be made for targets for asassination/genocide, but it will require a DNA samples from the victim. They're testing on bees right now.
 
2013-05-31 09:45:06 AM

vygramul: Whether it causes illness or shortened lifetimes requires scientific proof, not frightened assertions based on watching The Thing.


And those who are profiting from these products are waiting for the definitive result that the products are fully safe from qualified, independent, researchers before they release the product, right?
 
2013-05-31 09:48:21 AM

Tarl3k: To The Escape Zeppelin!: phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.

Has any of their food made anyone ill?

What is being done to our food supply isn't necessarily going to make anyone ill right now...the problem is that it will make us ill over the rest of our shortened lifetimes...


Citation, pl0x. Otherwise, cut the scaremongering.
 
2013-05-31 09:48:36 AM
Thanks, subby. Yet another anti-GMO argument shut down.
 
2013-05-31 09:50:15 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: vygramul: Whether it causes illness or shortened lifetimes requires scientific proof, not frightened assertions based on watching The Thing.

And those who are profiting from these products are waiting for the definitive result that the products are fully safe from qualified, independent, researchers before they release the product, right?


What test (or set of tests) would you accept?

Does any existing food (some of which comes from induced mutation techniques, hybridization, etc.) meet your criteria?
 
2013-05-31 09:52:03 AM

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Has any of their food made anyone ill?


I ate a GMO cucumber and I lost the hair in my pubic region.
 
2013-05-31 09:53:02 AM
Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.
 
2013-05-31 09:53:32 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: vygramul: Whether it causes illness or shortened lifetimes requires scientific proof, not frightened assertions based on watching The Thing.

And those who are profiting from these products are waiting for the definitive result that the products are fully safe from qualified, independent, researchers before they release the product, right?


Agriculture Canada, the Universities of Guelph and Saskatchewan food science programs would like to have a word with you.
 
2013-05-31 09:54:59 AM

Snubnose: Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.


Have you reviewed the available proof that it's not going to kill you and found it lacking in some way?
 
2013-05-31 09:55:42 AM

Snubnose: Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.


What's it like to live in constant fear? Also, you were just saying? Thanks for saying something to say that you said something. Some people might have been confused.

/Redundant statements are redundant
//Just saying was brought to you by the department of redundancy department
 
2013-05-31 09:58:23 AM

Snubnose: Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.


There really haven't been long term (multi-generational) studies that show GMO are safe.
Remember back in the olden days when we thought radiation was safe?
 
2013-05-31 09:59:08 AM
BEES?
 
2013-05-31 10:00:44 AM

Reaperman: Philip Francis Queeg: vygramul: Whether it causes illness or shortened lifetimes requires scientific proof, not frightened assertions based on watching The Thing.

And those who are profiting from these products are waiting for the definitive result that the products are fully safe from qualified, independent, researchers before they release the product, right?

Agriculture Canada, the Universities of Guelph and Saskatchewan food science programs would like to have a word with you.


So then the answer is yes? Wonderful. Tell me how many decades of exposure to the products did those independent studies test?
 
2013-05-31 10:00:45 AM
Monsnanto is an evil organization and I wouldn't try if their corporate board should be killed.  They're nothing but low-down, double-dealing, backstabbing, larcenous perverted worms.  Hanging's too good for them. BURNING is too good for them.  They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!

That being said, making up shiat and far fetched conspiracy theories about them deliberately trying to kill the world with poisoned genetic food is stupid.  They're an evil enough organization that you don't HAVE to make shiat up about this.
 
2013-05-31 10:08:29 AM
WW3:  The Bee Wars was on whatdoesitmean.com.  How could anyone take that shiat seriously?
 
2013-05-31 10:10:51 AM

Muta: Snubnose: Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.

There really haven't been long term (multi-generational) studies that show GMO are safe.
Remember back in the olden days when we thought radiation was safe?


There haven't been long-term (multi-generational) studies showing that just about any of the food you eat are safe. New varieties are constantly being discovered or invented (there are >40,000 varieties of rice today).

What food do you eat? Do you know when it was invented, and how it was tested?

Why should a standard of "multi-generational" testing apply only to GMO food (which has already been tested more stringently than just about any other method of producing a new variety)?
 
2013-05-31 10:16:15 AM
I ate a GMO tomato and my penis completely inverted

thanks alot GM0bama
 
2013-05-31 10:21:45 AM

Satanic_Hamster: Monsnanto is an evil organization and I wouldn't try if their corporate board should be killed.  They're nothing but low-down, double-dealing, backstabbing, larcenous perverted worms.  Hanging's too good for them. BURNING is too good for them.  They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!

That being said, making up shiat and far fetched conspiracy theories about them deliberately trying to kill the world with poisoned genetic food is stupid.  They're an evil enough organization that you don't HAVE to make shiat up about this.


The worst part is when you see perfectly well-meaning, capable activist liberals waste their time on the anti-GMO nonsense (as opposed to anti-Monsanto activism, which is totally justified, as you said).  I was saddened to visit the facebook page of an Occupy group I had been involved in a long time ago to find that they've gone whole-hog with this kind of nuttery.  They even had some anti-vaxx links posted.
 
2013-05-31 10:27:09 AM

Tarl3k: To The Escape Zeppelin!: phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.

Has any of their food made anyone ill?

What is being done to our food supply isn't necessarily going to make anyone ill right now...the problem is that it will make us ill over the rest of our shortened lifetimes...


Just like vaccinations and medicines put out by BIG PHARMA! We should probably also start using organic tin foil for our hats, the regular tin foil has been shown to cause increases in butt hurt.
 
2013-05-31 10:34:54 AM
Why are the hippy vegans attacking GMO maker Monsanto?  Hillary Clinton is a Monsanto lawyer, Bill Gates owns a huge chuck of Monsanto, as does far lefty George Soros, and Obama just passed the so called "Monsanto protection act" so Monsanto can continue to take over and monopolize the worlds food supply without being stopped by the courts by infusing seeds with insecticide and feeding animals hormones and insecticide infused corn and grains (not their natural food, but makes them grow fast).  The hippies are fighting their own side now.  That's funny.
 
2013-05-31 10:35:08 AM
images3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-05-31 10:36:46 AM
Just great. Watch people ignore the very real bee problem because the GMO conspiracy nonsense is now tangled up in it.
 
2013-05-31 10:39:08 AM

The Name: Satanic_Hamster: Monsnanto is an evil organization and I wouldn't try if their corporate board should be killed.  They're nothing but low-down, double-dealing, backstabbing, larcenous perverted worms.  Hanging's too good for them. BURNING is too good for them.  They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!

That being said, making up shiat and far fetched conspiracy theories about them deliberately trying to kill the world with poisoned genetic food is stupid.  They're an evil enough organization that you don't HAVE to make shiat up about this.

The worst part is when you see perfectly well-meaning, capable activist liberals waste their time on the anti-GMO nonsense (as opposed to anti-Monsanto activism, which is totally justified, as you said).  I was saddened to visit the facebook page of an Occupy group I had been involved in a long time ago to find that they've gone whole-hog with this kind of nuttery.  They even had some anti-vaxx links posted.


Head just asploded
 
2013-05-31 10:53:55 AM
Buzz off pal
 
2013-05-31 11:05:45 AM

Muta: Snubnose: Ya know I'm not really with the "Prove to me it's gonna kill me" I'm kinda like "Prove to me it's not gonna kill me" thinking. Just saying.

There really haven't been long term (multi-generational) studies that show GMO are safe.
Remember back in the olden days when we thought radiation was safe?


And Thalidimide?
And DDT?
And PCBs?

Man, good times....I'd clap if my arms worked.
 
2013-05-31 11:21:37 AM

X-boxershorts: Man, good times....I'd clap if my arms worked.


Just for shiats n grins...After the Thalidomide embarrassment, the onus shifted to proving their products did no harm before introducing them to the markets.

This actually happened to millions of children in the 50's because we trusted the marketing departments of Chemical companies.

blogs.smithsonianmag.com

The onus should always be on the manufacturer to prove their product does not cause harm.
Too many here seem to believe it's fine and dandy to introduce chemically altered products into nature
with very little need to prove it's safety.

Comments like, "can you prove it doesn't hurt anyone" is moronic and backwards thinking.

There are some things we, society, should never, ever forget.
 
2013-05-31 11:22:47 AM
Anyone else read that as:
"Palin mad at U.S. for siding with company responsible for eradication of bees"

made more sense
 
2013-05-31 11:24:38 AM

WTF Indeed: DarnoKonrad: No one should be able to patent the raw mechanics of life.  Unfortunately, this gets conflated with unfounded nonsense about the dangers of GMOs

The court ruling was very limited to specifics of the case and was a lose-win for copyright reformers.


I would find your comment more persuasive if you didn't advertise your ignorance. Copyright is irrelevant to the discussion at hand - you're thinking of patent, which is a very different thing.
 
2013-05-31 11:30:43 AM

X-boxershorts: X-boxershorts: Man, good times....I'd clap if my arms worked.

Just for shiats n grins...After the Thalidomide embarrassment, the onus shifted to proving their products did no harm before introducing them to the markets.

This actually happened to millions of children in the 50's because we trusted the marketing departments of Chemical companies.

[blogs.smithsonianmag.com image 575x251]

The onus should always be on the manufacturer to prove their product does not cause harm.
Too many here seem to believe it's fine and dandy to introduce chemically altered products into nature
with very little need to prove it's safety.

Comments like, "can you prove it doesn't hurt anyone" is moronic and backwards thinking.

There are some things we, society, should never, ever forget.


www.mugsysrapsheet.com
 
2013-05-31 11:33:37 AM

aircraftkiller: Tarl3k: To The Escape Zeppelin!: phenn: Straw man.

Monsanto is still an evil group of greedy assholes who couldn't give less than 1/4 a shiat about solving hunger problems. It's all about the Benjamins and they don't care if their crap makes you ill.

Has any of their food made anyone ill?

What is being done to our food supply isn't necessarily going to make anyone ill right now...the problem is that it will make us ill over the rest of our shortened lifetimes...

Citation, pl0x. Otherwise, cut the scaremongering.


False equivalence my ass. YOU are one of the worst offenders in this thread....

PROVE it does no harm before introducing this crap into nature.
 
2013-05-31 11:39:19 AM

X-boxershorts: X-boxershorts: Man, good times....I'd clap if my arms worked.

Just for shiats n grins...After the Thalidomide embarrassment, the onus shifted to proving their products did no harm before introducing them to the markets.

This actually happened to millions of children in the 50's because we trusted the marketing departments of Chemical companies.

[blogs.smithsonianmag.com image 575x251]

The onus should always be on the manufacturer to prove their product does not cause harm.
Too many here seem to believe it's fine and dandy to introduce chemically altered products into nature
with very little need to prove it's safety.

Comments like, "can you prove it doesn't hurt anyone" is moronic and backwards thinking.

There are some things we, society, should never, ever forget.


If you're going to use a warning, you shouldn't choose one on which the FDA withheld approval. That case just proves the FDA knows what it's doing.
 
2013-05-31 11:40:43 AM
You made the claims, you back them up. Expecting me to do your work for you is ridiculous. You don't get to say "GMOS ATE MY DOG AND BURNED DOWN MY HOUSE" but then decide that I'm the offensive one because I'm asking for proof of your assertions. Back it up or stop posting lies. Thanks!
 
2013-05-31 11:43:34 AM

BMulligan: WTF Indeed: DarnoKonrad: No one should be able to patent the raw mechanics of life.  Unfortunately, this gets conflated with unfounded nonsense about the dangers of GMOs

The court ruling was very limited to specifics of the case and was a lose-win for copyright reformers.

I would find your comment more persuasive if you didn't advertise your ignorance. Copyright is irrelevant to the discussion at hand - you're thinking of patent, which is a very different thing.


My apologizes for getting one word wrong. Obviously my argument is invalid because I typed the wrong word, even though the thesis of the argument still bears out.
 
2013-05-31 11:45:20 AM

WTF Indeed: BMulligan: WTF Indeed: DarnoKonrad: No one should be able to patent the raw mechanics of life.  Unfortunately, this gets conflated with unfounded nonsense about the dangers of GMOs

The court ruling was very limited to specifics of the case and was a lose-win for copyright reformers.

I would find your comment more persuasive if you didn't advertise your ignorance. Copyright is irrelevant to the discussion at hand - you're thinking of patent, which is a very different thing.

My apologizes for getting one word wrong. Obviously my argument is invalid because I typed the wrong word, even though the thesis of the argument still bears out.


It's not as though it was a random adjective or something. The "one word" you got wrong just happened to be the entire point of your post.
 
2013-05-31 11:45:27 AM

vygramul: X-boxershorts: X-boxershorts: Man, good times....I'd clap if my arms worked.

Just for shiats n grins...After the Thalidomide embarrassment, the onus shifted to proving their products did no harm before introducing them to the markets.

This actually happened to millions of children in the 50's because we trusted the marketing departments of Chemical companies.

[blogs.smithsonianmag.com image 575x251]

The onus should always be on the manufacturer to prove their product does not cause harm.
Too many here seem to believe it's fine and dandy to introduce chemically altered products into nature
with very little need to prove it's safety.

Comments like, "can you prove it doesn't hurt anyone" is moronic and backwards thinking.

There are some things we, society, should never, ever forget.

If you're going to use a warning, you shouldn't choose one on which the FDA withheld approval. That case just proves the FDA knows what it's doing.


The FDA also approved the use, by Monsanto, of Nicotinoids in GMO corn. Over the many objections of the scientists involved in the Guelph University study cited by Monsanto. In that case, political appointees overruled the scientists that you and I are paying for to have their scientific opinions.

The politics of profit was set aside after the Thalidomide embarrassment. Sciience ruled at FDA after that and the FDA changed their habitst.
Today, the FDA seems to have forgotten that lesson.

Which was part of the point I made in that post. We should not forget that lesson, but we seem to have don just that.
 
2013-05-31 11:50:16 AM

aircraftkiller: You made the claims, you back them up. Expecting me to do your work for you is ridiculous. You don't get to say "GMOS ATE MY DOG AND BURNED DOWN MY HOUSE" but then decide that I'm the offensive one because I'm asking for proof of your assertions. Back it up or stop posting lies. Thanks!


The only claim I made directed at you, was that you see no problem with allowing stuff like this in nature without the need to prove it can do no harm.

And I used your own comment, in it's full context, as my reference.

Monsanto does not and is still not being required to prove their products do no harm.
Even as evidence accumulates that many of their products actually do.

I have posted no fabrications. I used your own comment. If you find that troubling, I suggest you study it out.
 
2013-05-31 11:50:21 AM

BMulligan: It's not as though it was a random adjective or something. The "one word" you got wrong just happened to be the entire point of your post.


So are you going to argue against the my point that the PATENT reformers had a lose-win result in the case or are you just here to grammar nazi?
 
Displayed 50 of 68 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report