General Discussion

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)

63. And yet again, there you go.

Thu Oct 16, 2014, 02:07 PM

Oct 2014

The peer review process isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination, but my belief that it's a solid check against bias is founded in centuries of scientific method and research.

Your faith in your own belief--the denial of results and observation so that belief can be preserved--is akin to creationist or climate change denial argle bargle about a conspiracy among atheists and scientists to invalidate Christian beliefs about the world.

That "faith in science" meme is one of the dumbest out there.

Not to mention your blatant misuse of the word theory--if you're going to be discussing scientific method, you might want to learn what theory actually means. So, congratulations, two science denial memes in one post.

Look, if the science about GMOs ultimately ends up concluding that they're more harmful than not, I'll spin my beliefs on a fucking some and accept that. But as of right now, they don't conclude that.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

263 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bill Nye the Scinece Guy on GMOs [View all] eridani Oct 2014 OP

I enjoyed the video. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #1

WTF does labelling have to do with fear of science? eridani Oct 2014 #2

Really! "fear of science"?! For Crying OUT LOUD@! Gawd! Cha Oct 2014 #4

Anti GMO = anti vaxx = climate change denial. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #7

Labels provide information, that's all. merrily Oct 2014 #26

Like a label on a science textbook warning that evolution may be in doubt? alp227 Oct 2014 #121

+1 HuckleB Oct 2014 #171

You know it's not like that at all. merrily Oct 2014 #182

Actually, they wouldn't Scootaloo Oct 2014 #185

Thank you. I am totally confident that the combined resources of science and the US govt can merrily Oct 2014 #186

Science isn't involved Scootaloo Oct 2014 #188

Science might be helpful in coming up with wording. If I am mistaken, it's irrelevant to merrily Oct 2014 #189

You're operating purely on faith Scootaloo Oct 2014 #193

I wish I could rec individual posts. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #195

No, I am operating out of experience. merrily Oct 2014 #198

Yup, it's just a leavening agent Scootaloo Oct 2014 #200

But, my point is, I do google. Always. merrily Oct 2014 #208

It's not that simple. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #194

I never said it was simple. I do, however, aver it's not as impossible as it's being portrayed. merrily Oct 2014 #196

Its very simple Jim Beard Oct 2014 #205

No, it's not. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #214

Someone should put a label on this pigeon. yellowcanine Oct 2014 #212

This statement is whay too broad... Jim Beard Oct 2014 #209

Given that description, I imagine it would be hard for someone to know what you're talking about. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #219

Your equation is wrong and would be insulting if it weren't so stupid. KittyWampus Oct 2014 #33

Correct! BillZBubb Oct 2014 #80

+ 1000! Tumbulu Oct 2014 #93

That equation is quite correct. HuckleB Oct 2014 #144

Why is it you think your science is the only science. Jim Beard Oct 2014 #220

Science is science. HuckleB Oct 2014 #222

More like Monsanto's science. They spend millions on political donations in this country and sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #235

Anti-GMO labeling = climate change denial. pnwmom Oct 2014 #119

All three I listed are contradicted by science. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #126

There is NOTHING about truth in labeling that is contradicted by science. pnwmom Oct 2014 #175

I didn't list pro-labels, I listed anti-GMOs. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #226

There IS a scientific reason to label GMO's in food. pnwmom Oct 2014 #239

The FDA should know what is in the foods, ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #240

The FDA relies on industry studies. in the case of drugs, they rely on pnwmom Oct 2014 #242

And just where did you get that not-so-scientific opinion from? Are you seriously supporting sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #127

The vast majority of studies say GMOs are good. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #131

Give us an example of the claims 'people are making' about Monsanto that are false. sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #140

I have discussed this issue throughout this thread. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #148

The GMO producers control the research by limiting the seeds, requiring purchasers to sign pnwmom Oct 2014 #241

That's a myth. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #243

The "independent" researchers can only publish with the permission of the producers. pnwmom Oct 2014 #246

Scientific American wasn't wrong when that article was published, ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #249

Doesn't matter. GMO products were released during the years when the ban was in place, pnwmom Oct 2014 #250

The vast majority say that they are an ecological disaster eridani Oct 2014 #253

Most of the ones I have seen didn't concern resistant weeds. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #259

Isn't it wonderful to accelerate that process by 100-fold? n/t eridani Oct 2014 #261

No, anti-GMO is more like "Geo-engineering will solve climate change, so no worries". MH1 Oct 2014 #190

You must know how stupid that is. roody Oct 2014 #197

I'm not saying people who deny science on one will deny science on the others. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #229

lol closeupready Oct 2014 #231

That is a myth. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #6

There is no advantage to GMO whatsoever as long as it is controlled by corporations eridani Oct 2014 #9

Are there any peer-reviewed studies ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #10

So many that it's hardd to track them all eridani Oct 2014 #21

Did you know that Monsanto invented Astroturf? nxylas Oct 2014 #24

Correct! AstroTurf© was invented for a specific purpose, to replace living grass in the Astrodome: freshwest Oct 2014 #176

OK, I've spent much of my morning looking for actual ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #57

substantial increases in the number and volume of herbicides applied. J_J_ Oct 2014 #59

What number? HuckleB Oct 2014 #115

The real issue is not lawsuits but contamination of organic crops. merrily Oct 2014 #27

I'm not sure why that is an issue, ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #40

You might tell that to the farmers in Oxaca, Mexico, who got their corn crops contaminated after merrily Oct 2014 #43

The thread is about the video, which covered several GMO issues. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #45

Okay, not this thread, but this subthread. merrily Oct 2014 #48

This guy believed that we have the right to know what we are eating: bvar22 Oct 2014 #65

Do you think he still believes that? nt ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #66

At the time, I believed it,.... bvar22 Oct 2014 #68

I believed many of the things he said before his election. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #69

It's not. HuckleB Oct 2014 #90

Oh no they do not, I am a seed breeder Tumbulu Oct 2014 #95

Yes, they do. HuckleB Oct 2014 #96

I suggest that you stick to subjects that you have some knowledge of Tumbulu Oct 2014 #111

Is that why you can't support your claims? HuckleB Oct 2014 #160

Oh yeah? Do you work for Monsanto? Tumbulu Oct 2014 #94

Can you link us to the peer reviewed studies that prove your assertions? HuckleB Oct 2014 #97

If I am selling seed that is contaminated Tumbulu Oct 2014 #106

So you can't support your previous assertions. HuckleB Oct 2014 #108

No you obviously know nothing about my industry Tumbulu Oct 2014 #114

Oddly, I've supported my assertions while you have not. HuckleB Oct 2014 #132

So you can't prove your assertions that GMO doesn't contaminate other crops. Lost In America Oct 2014 #120

All crops "contaminate" other crops. HuckleB Oct 2014 #133

That is not USDA policy, so I don't know what's going on with the farmers you know. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #101

It is a business policy Tumbulu Oct 2014 #109

He's made the same claims repeatedly. HuckleB Oct 2014 #110

Yeah. It's clearly not USDA policy. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #113

The USDA does not purchase the crops. Tumbulu Oct 2014 #117

Well, he's not talking about basic facts of plant genetics, that's for sure. HuckleB Oct 2014 #136

No, no no Jim Beard Oct 2014 #146

good intentions pave the way to ... a what's that place again? belzabubba333 Oct 2014 #36

Definitely. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #41

"GMOs are currently people's best hope for ending world hunger." nationalize the fed Oct 2014 #105

Wow. I cannot believe I am reading this nonsense right here on DU. I have read it years ago sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #137

Do you believe that GMOs have no place in the solution to world hunger? HuckleB Oct 2014 #142

I'll go with the experts and the growing rejection worldwide of Corporations like Monsanto who were sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #150

First, Monsanto is one of several big companies in the business. HuckleB Oct 2014 #153

Your opinion is becoming more and more the minority opinion, thankfully, after decades of sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #169

Yes, at DU, my opinion is losing sway. HuckleB Oct 2014 #170

If only. Monsanto was voted the 'most evil corporation' recently by 51% of respondents in a poll sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #173

LOL!!!!!! HuckleB Oct 2014 #201

Banned from 30 countries. The poll simply reflects the Global opinion of this evil Corporation. sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #232

GMOs developed by NON-PROFIT entities like golden rice certainly do eridani Oct 2014 #255

Are there any studies about the events in India? nt ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #147

Here are a few links regarding the tragedy of Indian Farmers. sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #172

Thanks for the links. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #233

They're not because of GMOs. HuckleB Oct 2014 #215

The Scientific American article is interesting. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #234

FEAR of SCIENCE Cha Oct 2014 #8

If your opinion is based on peer-reviewed studies, ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #11

If you can link to a peer-reviewed study indicating labels=fear, please link to them also... LanternWaste Oct 2014 #38

I never claimed labels cause fear. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #39

I think the issue here druidity33 Oct 2014 #82

That is another myth. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #86

Feel free to post links to those... nt. druidity33 Oct 2014 #181

Would seeing independent studies ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #228

Would you druidity33 Oct 2014 #247

Those are good things to consider, in my opinion. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #260

I'll check it out, thanks. nt. druidity33 Oct 2014 #263

"What if people don't want to support fucking sociopathic corporations like Monsanto who make huge Cha Oct 2014 #15

We don't care because that doesn't happen. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #58

Well, you've noted an anti-GMO fiction. HuckleB Oct 2014 #98

Don't be ridiculous Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #13

Mahalo, Prophet. Cha Oct 2014 #16

There are two reasons I'm against GMO labels. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #17

OK, in response Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #19

I know my reasons against labels are based off speculation. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #20

Withholding information is not a solution to your fear of alleged fear of science or alleged merrily Oct 2014 #28

+1 nt laundry_queen Oct 2014 #31

No company labels the technology used to create the seed. HuckleB Oct 2014 #99

Hmmm, let's see...you use a plasmid to introduce a gene that produces a toxin Tumbulu Oct 2014 #122

In other words, you don't know what your talking about. HuckleB Oct 2014 #130

Oh right, and you do? Tumbulu Oct 2014 #141

Yeah, I do. HuckleB Oct 2014 #143

No, what you post is not OK Tumbulu Oct 2014 #152

Anyone can see your claims. HuckleB Oct 2014 #154

Really. Damn. Cha Oct 2014 #102

Didn't you know that withholding information promotes scientific literacy? eridani Oct 2014 #112

Here's my two responses. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #35

The problem is defining GM progressoid Oct 2014 #61

It's not my problem, or the problem of pretty much anyone who isn't a pro-GM booster. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #71

Golden rice is being developed by a non-profit corporation eridani Oct 2014 #123

That's why I gave that as an example of the sort of 'GM' Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #192

Yes, in a broad definition Jim Beard Oct 2014 #204

Medicines? Hell, we're also growing pharmaceuticals in our plants. progressoid Oct 2014 #225

My question exactly BrotherIvan Oct 2014 #84

And hiding the ingredients fosters mistrust. Rex Oct 2014 #51

They both have the same labels. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #53

I agree, a lot of people won't even notice they are buying GMO foods. Rex Oct 2014 #56

Well, one difference is that the gmo plants were patented Tumbulu Oct 2014 #125

Funny thing. Many plants were patented before GMOs, and continue to be so. HuckleB Oct 2014 #139

No, wrong again pal, they were the first open pollinated seed plants to be patented Tumbulu Oct 2014 #145

You've yet to prove me wrong. HuckleB Oct 2014 #149

Yes, why don't you read through that history? Tumbulu Oct 2014 #162

So, your only response is another logical fallacy? HuckleB Oct 2014 #164

I think that you need to read the history, and if you wont read Tumbulu Oct 2014 #166

I know the history. HuckleB Oct 2014 #168

beyond ridiculous I will ignore now Tumbulu Oct 2014 #254

No seed technology is labeled. Not one. HuckleB Oct 2014 #92

All they have to do is label food products. Rex Oct 2014 #177

It's not rocket science. It's baseless fear mongering. HuckleB Oct 2014 #202

Agreed. Don't see why Democrats, who are into regulation and informing people, would object. freshwest Oct 2014 #183

If you believe the fear of science hurts people, then you are helping perpetuate that Rex Oct 2014 #47

I don't think I have that much influence on other people. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #52

Yes, not really about you - just in general. Humans are suspicious and curious by nature imo. Rex Oct 2014 #54

I fear when science has not tested something that is new Tumbulu Oct 2014 #104

GMO plants have been tested more than any other type of plant. HuckleB Oct 2014 #163

Scientific epidemiological studies of GMO's post-FDA approval cannot be conducted without pnwmom Oct 2014 #118

Why is the label needed for the studies? nt ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #128

Because if people don't know that they have consumed a particular GMO product, pnwmom Oct 2014 #174

The researches can use the same methods they use for e-coli. ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #224

The funny thing about that argument is that they're not asking for labels for all seed technologies. HuckleB Oct 2014 #227

That is a good point. nt ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #230

Knowing the brand won't tell them whether it is a GMO product or not. n/t pnwmom Oct 2014 #244

Why wouldn't it? ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #245

Bill Nye, what a guy madokie Oct 2014 #3

Cool, he's my kind of Science Guy.. a smart one. Almost Cha Oct 2014 #5

I'm still blown away by what Tyson said madokie Oct 2014 #14

Well, I haven't really known that much about Bill Nye but now I love him due to his common sense Cha Oct 2014 #18

K&R B Calm Oct 2014 #12

And then there's the health risk. RiverLover Oct 2014 #22

Not sure GMO farming always uses less pesticide. freedom fighter jh Oct 2014 #23

In most cases it does, when it you actually look at the science. HuckleB Oct 2014 #89

What's your source? freedom fighter jh Oct 2014 #187

You are right that I should have done better with a source. freedom fighter jh Oct 2014 #191

That study has been solidly debunked several times. HuckleB Oct 2014 #203

There are lots of others that haven't been eridani Oct 2014 #257

What this reminds me of is the fact... ReRe Oct 2014 #25

Thank you, Mr. Science! LawDeeDah Oct 2014 #29

excellent video - NOT anti-GMO - but a call for disclosure and testing case by case Douglas Carpenter Oct 2014 #30

I don't see that we're 'fine'. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #32

+1000 Tumbulu Oct 2014 #129

We will never be 100% certain of anything, no matter how much it's studied. randome Oct 2014 #207

I wouldn't say it should be assumed so Erich Bloodaxe BSN Oct 2014 #213

great video G_j Oct 2014 #34

Sounds like he is taking a cautious attitude but not freaking out about it. liberal_at_heart Oct 2014 #37

Yes, and that is where I stand. hifiguy Oct 2014 #42

"Peer Reviewed!!1" scream the authoritarians whatchamacallit Oct 2014 #44

Actually, unscientific is not understanding how peer review fucking works. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #49

Uh huh whatchamacallit Oct 2014 #55

And yet again, there you go. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #63

Supercilious, belligerent, reactionary, reductionist... whatchamacallit Oct 2014 #70

Don't let your mind open so far it falls out. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #72

Since it seems this conversation is taking a slight turn for the better whatchamacallit Oct 2014 #83

Crop Scientists Say Biotechnology Seed Companies Are Thwarting Research Luminous Animal Oct 2014 #60

^^This!^^ BrotherIvan Oct 2014 #85

Yes, so true. It boggles the mind! Tumbulu Oct 2014 #134

But we're all so ignorant, the truth must be kept from us! BrotherIvan Oct 2014 #159

And then you repeat this old news? HuckleB Oct 2014 #88

Yes. I do. You do not, Pro GMO's say this is 30 years of settled science. A blatant lie. Luminous Animal Oct 2014 #100

"A blatant lie." HuckleB Oct 2014 #107

Only if you ignored who controls that science. As did the lead industry. As did coal industry. Luminous Animal Oct 2014 #116

So you can't support your assertions. Thus, you make baseless claims about "control." HuckleB Oct 2014 #135

So true, and they are not to be trusted. Tumbulu Oct 2014 #165

The same authoritarian corporatist assholes hifiguy Oct 2014 #64

Really? HuckleB Oct 2014 #91

That is all I ask, label food products correctly. Rex Oct 2014 #46

If GMOs are so beneficial, why not advertise them or, at least, label them? K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2014 #50

Bill Nye stole from Professor Proton! progressoid Oct 2014 #62

Note that he is talking about environmental effects as opposed to consumption. alarimer Oct 2014 #67

Science that is controlled by Monsanto, et.al. Luminous Animal Oct 2014 #74

Even then there were hundreds of independently funded studies. HuckleB Oct 2014 #79

And Monsanto controlled the publication. That was their terms for allowing the scientist access to Luminous Animal Oct 2014 #81

You seem to have some things you want to believe badly. HuckleB Oct 2014 #87

Careful there Bill. pa28 Oct 2014 #73

Please let me just step in here and comment.. because I'm not talking to Cha Oct 2014 #76

If GMO's were good for us, they would WANT them to be labelled. grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #75

You and I both know the more batshit labeling advocates NuclearDem Oct 2014 #78

No one who wants to label dangerous food products is crazy, IMHO. grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #178

Like we need labels to remind us what's not harmful? alp227 Oct 2014 #124

Anything that's "new and improved" is marketed as such, the fact they want to hide it, tells you its grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #179

I think they oppose labelling because it creates a possibly unnecessary stigma to the product. phleshdef Oct 2014 #167

If it was actually better, there would be no stigma. grahamhgreen Oct 2014 #180

Which is why the GOP is an insignificant force in politics today. randome Oct 2014 #210

Scientific literacy is on the side of those who want labels. Jim Beard Oct 2014 #218

I figure some GMO foods are harmless while others are questionable. phleshdef Oct 2014 #248

i think you're confusing him with gary scinece unblock Oct 2014 #77

Excellent. Thanks for posting k/r nationalize the fed Oct 2014 #103

I think they work for the "web washing firms". Jim Beard Oct 2014 #236

Excellent Bill Nye! He pretty much sums up what the Union of Concerned Scientists Tumbulu Oct 2014 #138

UCS is losing credibility, and impacts are being studied, and always have been. HuckleB Oct 2014 #151

Oh there you go- pick on the Union of Concerned Scientists Tumbulu Oct 2014 #155

You tried to use them in a classic logical fallacy. HuckleB Oct 2014 #157

They have been a clear voice for the non bought off scientists in the US, Tumbulu Oct 2014 #158

That's some cool, but baseless, propaganda you got there. HuckleB Oct 2014 #161

Mahalo, Tumbulu.. I did not know about Union of Concerned Scientists.. Cha Oct 2014 #251

Oh Mahalo Cha Tumbulu Oct 2014 #252

Aloha and Mahalo to you, Tumbulu! Cha Oct 2014 #256

ASYMMETRY OF MISINFORMATION: From Krugman To GMOs HuckleB Oct 2014 #156

Thanks for the video, always enjoy Bill Nye. I'm in favor of labeling, but the question at the end freshwest Oct 2014 #184

Bookmarking! B Calm Oct 2014 #199

How would labels prevent pollen from being blown about? randome Oct 2014 #206

Try crossing soybeans, peas or beans with the wind. Wheat is also very Jim Beard Oct 2014 #217

I'm no holier-than-thou, "if-everyone-did-what-I-do" character but... randome Oct 2014 #221

The issue isn't whether or not GMO is healthy to eat, it is what GMOs do to the ecosystem. MH1 Oct 2014 #238

About 30 years ago, when the corporate giants were in full takeover mode mountain grammy Oct 2014 #211

To the science lovers avove all else. Didn't science create the atomic bomb? Jim Beard Oct 2014 #216

Very true. randome Oct 2014 #223

Yes, genetic modification is equivalent to the atomic bomb. NuclearDem Oct 2014 #237

Guess what? A few years ago I unscientifically switched my car insurance from State Farm to Allstate eridani Oct 2014 #258

So, where are all the Monsanto apologists? <crickets> n/t eridani Oct 2014 #262