0

making it a "personal choice" to eat them or not is really just an invitation to make it yet another stupid new-age trend completely detached from reality

Are you saying that when I make a personal decision whether or not to use a product I am being stupid? In the case of new age nonsense like astrology, aroma therapy, crystal power and the healing power of copper bracelets and magnets (all of which have been thoroughly debunked) I agree. To rely on treatments which have been proven to have no benefit is stupid. When it comes to the unknown long term effects of GM foods on our health, the environment and bio-diversity (none of which are known), I resent my choosing to eschew them being labeled as stupid. That's not a reasonable rebuttal. That's just an ad hominem attack. I'm not saying GM foods should be banned. I'm saying I have the right to know so that I can make an informed choice.

0

I swear, the file was there yesterday.

0

Patience is a virtue

It's true, it is a Virtue. I'm not lying. It's one of the hardest thing to learn in life. I got no idea why all religion & all philosophy have Patience being part of their belief.

0

@LastMitch, patience is highly crucial for Islam but unfortunately... not everyone from any religion have a lot of patience...

0

< off topic >

Are you saying that when I make a personal decision whether or not to use a product I am being stupid?

Absolutely not. I don't know where you got that idea from, being fearful and rash, maybe, and later being caught in a "stupid new-age trend", maybe, we'll see. My point is that these kinds of labels serve a very devious purpose. People naturally ascribe credibility to a label, e.g., if they see "FDA approved" on something, they can rightfully assume that the product has been thoroughly tested and is safe for consumption (I'm not saying the FDA is the most trustworthy thing, this is just an example). The problem with a label that simply classifies a product (e.g., "GMO-free" or "organic") is that there is absolutely nothing about that classification that guarantees quality or any amount of testing, or anything else beyond the (usually) broad classification criteria. But, people will nonetheless get the same "quality assured" feeling about products baring that label. And then, it is merely a matter of (1) finding some anecdotal evidence of bad GMO products, (2) finding some anecdotal evidence of good non-GMO products, and/or (3) driving a publicity / whisper campaign for non-GMO products, and it will be enough to make the broad-brush association in people's minds that GMO == bad. And then, you get a bunch of people who fervently and proudly proclaim they only eat non-GMO products. And at this point, the truth no longer matters, the "stupid new-age trend" has started and it runs like a freight train.

This is exactly what is happening with organic foods now. Put a label on a broad classification whos criteria have nothing do directly with public health or environmental impact. Add some celebrity endorsements and some "feel good" ad campaigns. Throw in a few tree-hugers to create some ground swell, and a few "idealist" entrepreneurs to jump on the bandwagon. Tell a few tales. Show the humble local farmer against the evil food-corp. And so it keeps on going. And now, we have big food corporations making most of the overpriced organic foods, at lower quantities per hectar and lower quality, and in ways that are more harmful to the environment than more modern methods. And nobody makes a fuss about it because they feel they are doing the right thing, afterall, they make sure they always buy products with the shiny "organic" label... If that's not a "stupid new-age trend", I don't know what it is. This trend is already harmful enough, please don't throw a "non-GMO" trend on top of that.

Whether you know it or not, advocating for a GMO label is trying to throw that initial snowball that will grow into a mountain of insanity, where the truth has very little weight. It's really not about your personal consumption choices, not about the snowball, but the mountain (and the mountain of insanity is stupid).

In the case of new age nonsense like astrology, aroma therapy, crystal power and the healing power of copper bracelets and magnets (all of which have been thoroughly debunked) I agree. To rely on treatments which have been proven to have no benefit is stupid.

I disagree. All of these things have absolutely no reasonable explanation, i.e., they have no credible causal links at all. They can be discarded and tossed aside with extreme prejudice, they don't need to be debunked or "proven to have no benefit" (which is impossible, btw). Ridiculous claims require no attention until someone presents reliable evidence that there is something real to them. With the example of a claim of ill effects of modified crop genes on human health, it is a ridiculous one, since there is no causal link possible between the DNA sequences in your food and your health, because these genes are immediately broken up in the early stages of digestion. These claims can be tossed aside with extreme prejudice. And for the rest, GMOs are no different than other foods, and must undergo the same health and safety tests as any other food product.

If some people are concerned about the adverse health effects of electro-magnetic fields (and many, many people are), they could demand a label for foods that have not been grown in a large Faraday cage. Afterall, it is their right to make a "personal decision whether or not to use a product". Get it?

You cannot preemptively apply labels on things to satisfy people's unjustified fears. Not until they present credible justifications for those fears. And as you said about GMOs, "none of it is known". (and the original "lie" that I posted, that "GMO cause cancer", is indeed a big fat lie, a world famous one).

How things work in the rational world is that we apply as thorough testing as we know (so far) to be necessary to guarantee that a product is safe, and apply that to all products (e.g., by those standards GMOs are no different than other foods). We ban things we find out have bad effects (like lead, asbestos, or DDTs), as soon as we find out about it, not before (just out of some superstitious fear of something). Advocating for strong and independent regulatory bodies in all matters of health, safety and environmental impact is a very worthy endeavour. And if you say that the work that the FDA, EPA, or Health Canada, or any other homologues, do to establish the safety of GMOs (and other food products) is not sufficient (or worse), then say so, and I would generally agree. But a GMO label does more harm than good, and it's a red herring.

End of rant.

< / off topic >

0

Patience? I thought that was a card game...

At first I didn't understand what you are talking about.

But you are correct!

You're not lying, you are telling the truth! It is a card game!

http://www.pagat.com/patience/patience.html

Apparently, there is only 1 player playing this card game and it's called Patience in UK and Solitaire in America.

Now that is freaky funny regarding about the meaning to be Patience

0

I never had sex with that woman!

Bill Clinton said that. I think. I might be wrong.

0

Person X is as Nazi/Communist/Fascist
Y will destroy the economy!
It's not my fault/It's all their fault.
I had no knowledge of the <systemic criminal activity> in my company/department.

anti-science lies
Very small doses or low energy radiation will make you sick.
GMOs are dangerous.
7,000,000,000 humans can't affect the planet.
Evolution is a lie/The planet is only 6,000 year old

Edited by Agilemind

0

"Clearly, any mention of banning certain weapons brings the expected response from those taking a specific interpretion of the second amendment. I am assuming that these people would agree that allowing private citizens to possess and freely carry stinger missiles and grenade launchers would be outside the second amendment guidelines"

Would they? The intention of the 2nd amendment was to have a militia to defend the country when need be which would cover stinger missiles, grenade lauchers, PRGs, tanks etc... Another common argument is that they need them to defend themselves from gov't oppression which as the Libya has shown would also cover them. If we take the "defend themselves from criminals" argument then you could restrict it to whatever criminals have, but since many criminals either buy/steal whatever is legally available to everyone I don't see why you cannot restrict it as much as one wants as long as the restriction is enforced properly (since you would also be restricting what is available to criminals).

Edited by Reverend Jim: Fixed formatting

1

global warming is caused by humans

Just to correct the typo, the world famous lie is:

"global warming is not caused by humans"

0

There was no such typo in my statement. Global warming, like global cooling, is a natural phenomena that occurs every so often during the Earth's history. :)

Edited by Ancient Dragon

0

Does the word typo kinda like a iffy word. It's like covering a person statement or backtrack of a statement. I mean Politician used that often. I guess it's OK for everyone to used it because everyone is Honest.

1

Does the word typo kinda like a iffy word.

I don't understand what you're saying. A typo is just when you mis-spell a word or skip over a word or two as you type. It is most unfortunate when the skipped over word in question is the negation (the "not" or "n't"). It has nothing to do with what is called "backpedaling", as politicians do all so often, which is to retract from a previously stated position after a storm of criticism about it (that's when you hear BS talk about "it didn't come out right", "I didn't mean to say that", or "it is unfortunate that people have interpreted my words in this offending way", and so on).

There was no such typo in my statement. Global warming, like global cooling, is a natural phenomena that occurs every so often during the Earth's history. :)

Oh well, I was just trying to save you the embarrassment of leaving people thinking you were disconnected from reality. ;) But now that you've doubled-down, I can't save you anymore... I'm sorry.

Yeah, climate changes are naturally occurring, but they don't happen by magic. Everytime they occurred before there was either a major event (e.g., massive meteor), or some major factor (usually geological or biological) that caused it. This time, that major factor is us, humans. All the evidence points to that. I don't know why I even waste time arguing about this...

2

global warming is caused by humans

I agree that this is a big lie AD and also the fact that the majority think that we live on a squashed sphere is just misdirection by a number of scientists. Scientists know nothing, they just want to stop us carrying on with our lives and tell us a pack of lies. All right-minded folk know that we live on a disc and that people have nothing to do with global warming. :p

Edited by diafol

Votes + Comments
thank goodness for that last sentence!
0

We live on a Square and Stationary Earth.

Convincing. I shall disregard my earlier follies and follow this fact. Scripture's argument against a globe are convincing. Hah! Religion triumphs over Science once again. God also states that guns are good and our oil reserves are as the fish and bread of His Son. He will bestow upon us the warmer climate that we deserve for our endeavours. He marvelled at our industriousness and saw that it was good.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.