Around 88% of scientists believe GMO products are safe. Studies of animals consuming millions/billions of meals over decades prove they're safe.
So why is the scientific concensis suspect in this case, but not in the case of mmgw?
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
Others claim 33% of adults believe gmo's are unsafe, which would include Liberals.
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
TBH it is almost like comparing apples to oranges. These are two completely different fields of scientific inquiry.
Yet, it's obviously because the theory of mmgw does not always employ verifiable research methods, many prognosis of mmgw popularizers are scientifically subpar or logically deficient and even some of the data is proven to be falsified (e.g. "hockey stick graph").
Not to mention highly active environmentalist lobbists and leftists idealogues that push mmgw narrative.
Also the fact that "global warming" now seems to be replaced with "climate change," narrative as if they cannot make up their mind what agenda to push.
Moreover, you seem to assume that there is no valid argument against GMO. I am sure if we looked for credible scientists that oppose the mainstream consensus on GMO, there would be many.
BTW Mainstream opinion does not mean it is the correct opinion. Scientist have bias, technology can be politicised etc etc.
there's nothing about the scientific community in that, so where is the citation to back up your claim that "Around 88% of scientists believe GMO products are safe"?
they had to change the term because too many under-educated simpletons insisted that "global warming" was proven wrong if it was relatively cold in their town on a particular morning. The hope was that said uneducated simpletons would be deflected from their idiotic and fallacious argument and forced to confront the problem of an ever-rising global mean temperature. obviously a fruitless venture.
__________________
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
Last edited by Bashar Teg on Jan 19th, 2017 at 06:56 PM
TBH the whole idea that 90% of scientific community thinks this, 76% of that community thinks that etc. etc. is BS. These numbers cannot even be feasibly measured.
Gender: Male Location: 4th Street Underpass, Manhattan
Even if this were true, it would seem that your argument is that liberals ignorance of GMOs justifies conservative ignorance of Climate change. How is that helpful to anybody? Seems to perpetuate a cycle of hypocrisy and ignorance.
Nah. They have to keep changing the terms because all of their predictions keep failing to happen. That is why they now use the extremely Vague term of "Climate Change".
__________________ Banned 30 days for the Crime of "ETC"... and when I "ETC" I do it HARD!!!
The organelles in Eukaryotic cells were other simple cells once. It took 1.5 billion years for this to happen, one cell to consume another... Scientists now look at complex organisms as colonies, this view is helping us to understand Cancer. Any Scientist who said no method of transmission for gene transfer in genetically modified organisms as a definite would be jumping the gun somewhat. Especially given recombinant technologies are only 50-60 years old. In the history of life on Earth (3.5 Billion years), that's not much.
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 19th, 2017 06:16 PM
