Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

HickFromTheTick

(56 posts)

2. Ooooh, his methods were "attacked by critics"

Reply to Archae (Original post)

Tue Oct 13, 2015, 03:50 PM

Oct 2015

It says that funding "science" is "bad" and implies that one side of the argument can't be trusted due to conflict of interest. Sort of leaves the Frankenfoodies twistin' in teh wind on their own rope, because as outright owners of all of the labs that produce pro-gmo propaganda they have lab-funding conflict of interest pretty much wrapped.
Illustrates greatly how sleazy they are, reading private email and such. Other that that, it says nothing of note.

"Wow, one anti-gmo guy said that it would be good to have scientific evidence to produce in an important court setting. How awful that is compared to soaking our food in even more poison." "And his methods were attacked by CRITICS!!!! CRIIIITICS!!!!"

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

21 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I've been accused of being an "industry shill" over GMO's... [View all] Archae Oct 2015 OP

People need to remember "big food" is not only on one side of this battle. jeff47 Oct 2015 #1

Ooooh, his methods were "attacked by critics" HickFromTheTick Oct 2015 #2

Sure, because there's only two sides to "science" Major Nikon Oct 2015 #5

Thank you for giving this post the sarcasm it deserved. pnwmom Oct 2015 #8

Sure, because someone who channels Benbrook and simultaneously rails on corporate influence... Major Nikon Oct 2015 #15

Well, I won't accuse anyone of being a shill, but... Shandris Oct 2015 #3

Sure, that and 120,999 other places Major Nikon Oct 2015 #4

Yes, I'm quite aware of how paid shills spread their info to multiple sites... Shandris Oct 2015 #9

Sure, everyone who pokes holes in your sieve MUST be on someone's payroll Major Nikon Oct 2015 #11

Switches to mockery like a (predictable, paid) champ. Shandris Oct 2015 #18

Whole Foods paid shills always fold when challenged Major Nikon Oct 2015 #20

If I had a dime for all the times I've watched posters get accused of shilling for XYZ Rex Oct 2015 #6

So it's fine for Big Food to fund science research, but not organic farmers? pnwmom Oct 2015 #7

But IS it research? Or more fakery by guys like Seralini? Archae Oct 2015 #10

Jebus Fucking Christ on a pogo stick Major Nikon Oct 2015 #17

Sure, because nothing says "Small Food" like Whole Foods Major Nikon Oct 2015 #12

Someone has to stand up to Monsanto, Dupont, BASF, Bayer, Dow Chemical, and Sygenta. pnwmom Oct 2015 #13

Sure, because they are doing it for all the right free market libertarian reasons Major Nikon Oct 2015 #14

I'm so anti-GMO I refuse to eat seedless grapes (nt) Nye Bevan Oct 2015 #16

Food industry enlisted academics in GMO lobbying war, emails show nationalize the fed Oct 2015 #19

Wholey Shit! It's Goliath vs Goliath with John Mackey as David! Major Nikon Oct 2015 #21