Just another Donkey who simply refuses to read the articles I have produced :smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by helge
Printable View
Just another Donkey who simply refuses to read the articles I have produced :smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by helge
Was a good one, eh ? :)
Yeah my compliments:)Quote:
Originally Posted by helge
Cease and desist order for erroneous use of the word 'Fact'.Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
since when was Forbes a scientific authority? even your supposed authoritative sources are paid for by tainted groups. You simply have no idea how to weed out spurious documents.
You have proved nothing and you have no facts so stop pretending that you do.
All you have done is to search for something, anything that proves your supposition. You then accept that as fact. It isn't, and you lack the mental capacity to prove otherwise.
When your other facts were trashed as nonsense, why did you continue to deny the rebuttal?
nice bit of cherry picking there , are the articles in my post 168 and 169 a load of bollocks too? were it says that the EU has said GM FOODS have been imported in the EU since 2012 , and why not see a to just who wrote the article in forbes? you cannot even prove that wrong , its like saying that every news article in either Fox or the Daily Mail is a lie ,but if its in the "Guardian" its the gospel ,if you think any of the articles are spurious go ahead and prove it, but you 't so true to left wing form attack the messenger ,you really are a sad sick joke :smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
Hey Moped man , the guy who wrote the Article in Forbes is called Jon Entine ,his CV is on the right of the article along with his photograph, are you really trying to inform me that you know far more than he will ever know in his particular field , now spit the dummy tit out and continue with your personal name calling :)
Hey Moped Man this is the guy who wrote the Forbes article which you have dismissed without saying why ,just that its in Forbes so has to be a load of crap ,Mind you he has one redeeming feature though, he's a democrat!:) here is the lowdown on him , no doubt true to form the TD "experts" will try and belittle him Jon Entine: Jon writes on sustainability, corporate responsibility, DNA, race, and Jewish identity.
Hey Moped man , just a few facts ,for openers World wide 5million people a year die from smoking related diseases and 2.5million die of Alcohol related diseases ,plus Thailand is officially #3 in the World for road accident deaths and how many are crippled and are wheel chair material is any ones guess , and yet in my post #168 after years of research no one has ever died of consuming GM food of which you are so outspoken against to the verge of sheer Paranoia :rofl:, can I assume then in the interests of your personal heath and well being that you neither Smoke ,Drink,or ride your Moped on Thailand's roads , just a few more facts about the daily carnage on Thailands roads we read about day in day out Thailand ranks world
Sorry members but "moped man" is the name I have Christened Chassamui with ,may Buddha bless his left wing paranoid socks :smileylaughing:
Five consecutive posts without a hint of understanding in any of them. My critique is not against any subject you happen to fall over on any given day. It is your simpleton mantra that only you could possibly be right.
You have quoted an author and his list of supposed expertise has nothing at all to do with GM food, your current pet subject.
What does Thai road deaths have to do with GM food?
Unlike you I have no political inclination to the left or the right. I have a mind of my own and choose to question others who have been blinded by headlines and sound bites without truly understanding the subject.
Your crusades are all rather pointless and far too complex for your limited comprehension. There are far too many unknowns in GM foods and climate change for anyone to give a definitive answer. You seem to think that scanning a few opinions is authoritative provided it fits your preconceived viewpoint.
I have never seen you provide any empirical evidence to support the science involved in any of your pathetic opinions. When you are an experienced researcher, it is possible to filter out nonsense and speculation in evidence.
If you could spell and use language correctly you might make a tabloid hack look smart. As you have neither the skills or the IQ necessary to argue a case, I suggest you either give up or buy a new shovel and keep digging that hole full of stupid.
Is moped man meant to be funny? Is it a heavily disguised insult? Fascinating choice for a chump.
Again you fail to grasp the situation , In no way do I say I am right in my assumptions ,but unless I can bring firm evidence to dispel what people who are far more qualified than I to say that GM foods are safe I have to believe them , just what are your undoubted qualifications to say they are not? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
OF course you know far far more than the British Farmers union ,who recommend without exception that the British farmers grow GM FOODS as this is the only way forward to feed our ever increasing world population , having said all all that if you have an alternative to feed the world in your renowned field is this subject by all means spell it out , but lets face it you can't can you, instead you choose to critisize my views without having one of your own , your sheer paranoid hypocrisy is truly beyond my comprehension , maybe you should read Mary Shellies science fiction novel as recomemnded by
Trotskiland dweller Troy tempest the TV show puppetQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
here is the article naturally to be totally ignored Action Alert: National Farmers Union urges farmers to promote GMO's - Weston A. Price Foundation - London Chapter (London, England) - MeetupQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiTrotskiland dweller Troy tempest the TV show puppetQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
Quite. You read my post but you were not paying attention as usual.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
It is against your lack of dilligence in pursuit of a preconceived idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
I cannot be held responsible for your failure to understand a complex issue. It is pointless entering into a discussion with someone who cannot understand basic research principles.
Who wrote the article? Who paid for the research? Is the NFU an interested party? Do they have a political agenda. Do they represent vested interests in this debate?Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
This is the difference between you and me, I am able to filter information without the need to read the article. This is based on knowledge and experience, both of which you seem impervious to.
If it was a peer reviewed scientific thesis based on empirical evidence then it might be worth a look. Even then you need to look at the organisation that sponsored the research.
With you it's about quantity of information. For those with a genuine interest and the ability to understand, it's about the quality and probity of the evidence.
I have said it before but it clearly needs to be said again. I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you. Your response has made it clear, you are simply incapable of such understanding.
May I Again refer you to the articles in my post s #168 and #169 and also the article in Forbes you say my info is some how spurious ,any chance of providing proof to back up your claims , we both know you can't, but instead try and cast doubts on my intelligence which has SFA to do with the articles I have produced ,but instead choose to run round round like a mad dog chasing its own tail .:smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
Moped Man your response is quite clear ,you regard all news items as some how "politically motivated" maybe you can read the BBC news Item in my post#170 about GM tomato's soon to be on the shelves ,which prompted me to start this thread in the first place , is it politically motivated or just a simple news item that GM foods have after years of research by people far and away more intelligent that you would ever hope to be or some evil right wing propaganda and a pack of lies from start to finish?:)
Which part of 'You clearly lack the capacity to understand' did you fail to understand this time?Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
if you only listen when you are speaking, you will remain dumb forever.
It is not my job to understand things for you.
Just apply the same criteria that I applied to the farmers union bollocks above. Do it now, and don't come back until you understand it. Look for credible, authoritative, untainted, empirical evidence. Question everything about the source. Read what is actually written and not just the bits that fit your position on the issue. Analyse every statement critically.
When you have done that you might be able to come with something of value other than gratuitous personal comments and childish laughter smileys. Until then you cannot expect anyone to take you seriously.
My apologies if this causes the dumb thread to collapse.
I see no point whatsoever in continuing with this as you regard everything about GM foods even though you cannot bring any evidence to the contrary that its safe and see it as some sort of right wing conspiracy , I produce the links its up to you to discount them with solid evidence to discount them which you have failed miserably to do so ,instead you continue to shoot the messenger and not the message , over and out ,I surmise you comprehend what over and out means :smileylaughing:Quote:
Originally Posted by chassamui
I have explained to you three times already that I have no interest in dicussing the merits or otherwise of GM foods. The fact that you repeat my perceived postion on the subject when I have yet to comment on it, proves every point I have raised with you.
To clarify.
You do not read what is being written.
Your mind is closed.
You take absolutely no heed of advice.You do not understand evidence or critical thinking and analysis, despite being told exactly what to do to justify your position. You have therefore failed and your entire argument is worthless.
It is not others job to understand all this.
Sticking your tongue out, putting your thumbs in your ears, and wiggling your fingers is not a cohesive or credible debate. The childish laughing smilys are entirely appropriate for your level ability.
You have wasted enough of my time already. Talking to you is like trying to educate pork. Bye bye stupid.
This lifted from an article in your own link.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoihere is the article naturally to be totally ignored Action Alert: National Farmers Union urges farmers to promote GMO's - Weston A. Price Foundation - London Chapter (London, England) - MeetupQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiTrotskiland dweller Troy tempest the TV show puppetQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
I couldn't be bothered after this.
Hoisted by your own petard.
Doesn't look good.Quote:
Dear All.
As you can see from this press release at the bottom of this email, National Farmers Union are promoting here an event that aims to bring farmers and genetic engineers to develop policy for your food supply.
They claim there to be a food crisis that GMO's will solve, presenting no evidence.
We have Jeffrey Smith MA and Dr Stephanie Seneff of prestigious MIT are speaking at our next conference speaking against GMO crops and Roundup. Stephanie, in particular, wrote a paper published by Reuters stating that Roundup destroys gut flora because the metabolic pathways in pests disrupted by Roundup exist in our gut flora. This is a game changer, because Monsanto previously claimed that Roundup doesn't affect humans because those pathways are not in human cells, but they act as a pesticide in our digestive tract and presumably elsewhere in the body. That would explain why a number of rat studies showed infertility and death in the third generation of GMO fed animals.
The following link shows Jeffrey Smith interviewing Stephanie on the topic, going into detail of the metabolic pathways affected by the pesticides that GMO crops are being designed to accept more of and even produce in their own leaves, that we then ingest.
Anyone looking for an argument to counter piwanis claims need only read the links he posts, as he clearly doesn't read them himself
Quote:
Another video you may find of interest is this independent film reporting on the experiences US farmers have had regarding loss of buying power and control over seed supply resulting in higher prices and reduced choice, alongside increased pesticide resistance in crops and lower yields, suggesting that the push for GMO is more about corporate control over the supply chain rather than the resolution of any food crisis:
I did say it was not worth reading and explained why. You have just proved me correct.
Piwiannoy is proof positive that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Given that he has so little he is probably only a danger to himself, so that's ok then.
No they are not bollocks. However the "headlines" are carefully worded, in a similar way to the ones before, in order to attract the gullible and stupid aka piwanoi et al. (thank-you chassamui for the words)Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
Firstly, one can see straight away from the spelling that there is US involvement. A quick look at Wiki and we see that EuropaBio is a biotech industry group whose members include Monsanto. So much for a different perspective or a more European POV.
Now lets turn to how many crops are actually grown in the EU. A simple look at the FAQ on the link you provided reveals:
That would make the average person wonder why are the EU being NIMBY's over GM crops. Now let's look at the imported GM foods:Quote:
As of 2012, just two GM crops have been approved for cultivation in Europe.
The more widely grown of the two, MON810, is a type of maize that helps fight off pests, such as the European corn borer.
The second approved product is a potato for industrial use called Amflora, approved in 2010. Its waxy starch content is useful for making paper, for example.
Several member states have issued (legally questionable) bans on cultivation of one or both of these crops approved at EU level.
hmm this is getting interesting. Most GM food is going into the animal food chain so how does that headline about millions of people eating GM food get into the fact sheet:Quote:
Europe imports a substantial portion of its animal feed, and a large part of the world’s supply is GM.
Around 30 million tons of grain are imported per year from third countries, including 13 million tons of soybeans, 22 million tons of soymeal, 2,5 million tons of maize, 2 million tons of oilseed rape and 0.1 million tons of cotton.
European animal farmers rely on soybeans imports for animal feed. Europe imports most of the soybeans it uses, and those imports are mostly GM from North and South America.
See our factsheet for more information on the global grain trade and GM crops' role.
And there you have it. Another one of your irrefutable facts unceremoniously debunked.Quote:
Labelling is mandatory within the EU for all food and feed products consisting of, containing, or obtained from GM plants when this is above 0.9% of that ingredient.
GM crops are very often used for animal feed.
Animal derived products such as meat, eggs or milk do not have to be labeled.
Now what is that Europeans think about GM Crops....Let's see EuropaBio's FAQ:
An attempt at trying to spin things round but it seems it isn't doing a great deal of good for this industrial giant.Quote:
Anti-GMO groups claim that Europeans are overwhelmingly opposed to GM food and crops. But often they base these claims on incorrect readings of public opinion polls. What do surveys actually say about the current state of public opinion? Some polling results and questions are misleading. For example, some polls asked people to rank their levels of concern and asked them to agree or disagree with statements like “GM food is unnatural”, “makes you feel uneasy” or “GM food is not good for you.”
Questions that ask people to quantify “how worried they are” obviously record high levels of concern. Reliable public opinion pollsters don’t use such methods; instead, they ask people to rank their concerns instead of prompting them with suggestions of what those concerns might be. Eurobarometer did this in 2010, asking 16,000 Europeans: “… in your own words, what are all the things that come to your mind when thinking about possible problems or risks associated with food and eating? Just say out loud whatever comes to mind and I will write it down.”
According to Eurobarometer 2010 on food related risks, only 8% of Europeans spontaneously say they are worried about GM in food. People are more worried about: 1) chemical products, 2) food poisoning, 3) diet-related diseases, 4) obesity, 5) lack of freshness, and 6) food additives, colours and preservatives.
Although there is concern about GM and biotechnology, consumers report a low level of knowledge about GM food. When a consumer has no direct experience or verifiable evidence to support concerns, he or she takes a much more cautious approach. In one recent survey, 34% of Europeans found a clear deficit of information on GMOs; as a result, many have yet to form their final opinion on the subject.
The EU Research Project CONSUMERCHOICE looked at the actual purchasing behaviour of consumers when given the opportunity to choose between GM and non-GM foods. The project found that responses given by consumers when prompted by questionnaires about GM-food are not a reliable guide to what they do when shopping in grocery stores. Furthermore, the study concluded that Europeans do buy GM-foods when they are physically present and labelled on the shelves. Still, even now a large percentage of people recognise that there are benefits. According to another Eurobarometer, 77% of Europeans said that they agreed that the European Union should encourage its farmers to take advantage of biotechnology in agriculture.
May I suggest that you read through the EU policy on GM crops and then explain how all those wonderfully intelligent scientists have decided that GM crops are safe and allowing their unrestricted use within the European Union.
BTW you may also want to look up the etymology of Luddite. I noticed its use on the EuropaBio site so I can see where you got the word from but do you really think it applies?
Incidentally Toytskyland is a memorial to GiT, another deranged manic, although he could at least string a coherent sentence together.
I'm not really Troy, the puppet from Stingray, it's just an avatar.
Coffee meets keyboard via nose. A real laugh (gurgle) out loud momentQuote:
Originally Posted by Troy
The GF thinks I am having a seizure.
Yeah thanks for bringing the claim about the rats ,which was found under further scrutiny to be quite false and was withdrawn , here is just one of many articles to substantiate this ,its also in another link in fine print some were but I just can't be bothered scanning all of them ,just Googled this one up , the simple fact remains is according to the articles in my posts 168 and 169 the EU regards 47 kinds of GM foods/crops as safe since April 2012 and are allowing there importation .Study Linking GM Maize To Rat Tumors Is Retracted - SlashdotQuote:
Originally Posted by KoojoThis lifted from an article in your own link.Quote:
Originally Posted by piwanoihere is the article naturally to be totally ignored Action Alert: National Farmers Union urges farmers to promote GMO's - Weston A. Price Foundation - London Chapter (London, England) - MeetupQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoiTrotskiland dweller Troy tempest the TV show puppetQuote:
Originally Posted by piwanoi
I couldn't be bothered after this.
Hoisted by your own petard.
Doesn't look good.Quote:
Dear All.
As you can see from this press release at the bottom of this email, National Farmers Union are promoting here an event that aims to bring farmers and genetic engineers to develop policy for your food supply.
They claim there to be a food crisis that GMO's will solve, presenting no evidence.
We have Jeffrey Smith MA and Dr Stephanie Seneff of prestigious MIT are speaking at our next conference speaking against GMO crops and Roundup. Stephanie, in particular, wrote a paper published by Reuters stating that Roundup destroys gut flora because the metabolic pathways in pests disrupted by Roundup exist in our gut flora. This is a game changer, because Monsanto previously claimed that Roundup doesn't affect humans because those pathways are not in human cells, but they act as a pesticide in our digestive tract and presumably elsewhere in the body. That would explain why a number of rat studies showed infertility and death in the third generation of GMO fed animals.
The following link shows Jeffrey Smith interviewing Stephanie on the topic, going into detail of the metabolic pathways affected by the pesticides that GMO crops are being designed to accept more of and even produce in their own leaves, that we then ingest.
Anyone looking for an argument to counter piwanis claims need only read the links he posts, as he clearly doesn't read them himself
Quote:
Another video you may find of interest is this independent film reporting on the experiences US farmers have had regarding loss of buying power and control over seed supply resulting in higher prices and reduced choice, alongside increased pesticide resistance in crops and lower yields, suggesting that the push for GMO is more about corporate control over the supply chain rather than the resolution of any food crisis: