General Discussion

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)

30. NO they don't.

Reply to bananas (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 1, 2016, 09:28 PM

Jul 2016

99% pure bullshit. GMOs are a good thing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

107 Nobel laureates sign letter blasting Greenpeace over GMOs [View all] Recursion Jun 2016 OP

Greenpeace has it right. nt bananas Jun 2016 #1

Not this time. HERVEPA Jun 2016 #5

No, it does not. HuckleB Jul 2016 #23

NO they don't. Drahthaardogs Jul 2016 #30

Greenpeace couldn't be more wrong if it tried. HuckleB Jul 2016 #33

On this, Greenpeace is .. bananas Albertoo Jul 2016 #51

This is the part where some mouthbreather says 107 nobel laureates are taking money from Monsanto. Act_of_Reparation Jun 2016 #2

That has been their basic response. HuckleB Jul 2016 #45

FINALLY, Science is fighting back against the pseudoscientific piffle of the anti-GMO morons! eom MohRokTah Jun 2016 #3

I'm not against GMOs. blogslut Jun 2016 #4

Agreed. I'm not against GMOs per se, but I DO oppose a lot of the business practices that accompany Coventina Jun 2016 #7

Those business practices predate the introduction of GMOs, sometimes by decades, so what... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #9

Fair point, but I think the GMO issue has exacerbated the situation. n/t Coventina Jun 2016 #11

Not really, and part of it is biology, a lot of crops are hybrids(not GMOs), and to save time... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #13

As humans, we certainly have got ourselves into a pickle, I agree. Coventina Jun 2016 #15

The issue is that GMOs can be environmentally friendly, and seed saving counterproductive... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #16

You seem to be ascribing to me a bunch of opinions that I don't have and have not expressed. Coventina Jun 2016 #17

That is true, and I apologize about ascribing such opinions to you, call it a prejudice... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #18

Agreed. GMOs are part of a constellation of things we need to work on. Coventina Jun 2016 #19

Yeah, what I really can't stand are those who discard the tools we have because they... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #20

That has nothing to do with GMOs. HuckleB Jul 2016 #24

It's just another anti-GMO talking point that has been shot down numerous times Major Nikon Jul 2016 #31

So glad that Greenpeace is effective and influential. roody Jun 2016 #6

So that they can help increase suffering in the world? So they can halt and hinder scientific... Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #10

Yeah, sure.... roody Jun 2016 #21

What is the basis for the opposition then? n/t Humanist_Activist Jun 2016 #22

"Effecive influence," apparently. HuckleB Jul 2016 #26

K&R for science and reason! Dr Hobbitstein Jun 2016 #8

Science has to work so much harder than pseudoscience. HuckleB Jul 2016 #27

Can't argue with 107 NPP winners. Rex Jun 2016 #12

You certainly can. Donald Ian Rankin Jul 2016 #34

Indeed. Though considering that this is a fair percentage of NP winners, ... HuckleB Jul 2016 #35

Have at it, I bet you lose. Rex Jul 2016 #38

It's very hard to argue with especially after looking at the breakdown of which category they won: RAFisher Jun 2016 #14

Nah, all you have to do is scream, "Shills!" HuckleB Jul 2016 #57

A plea to Greenpeace by Mark Lynas HuckleB Jul 2016 #25

Good. The Left must aggressively go after ALL anti-science Luddites within our midst. Meldread Jul 2016 #28

Greenpeace’s Colonialist Ambitions HuckleB Jul 2016 #29

What a world without GMOs would look like. HuckleB Jul 2016 #32

The anti-GMO brigade has a lot in common with the anti-vaccination crowd (nt) Nye Bevan Jul 2016 #36

Fictions galore. HuckleB Jul 2016 #37

It's kind of a goofy letter: Chathamization Jul 2016 #39

Wow... you find malnutrition deaths "goofy"? Recursion Jul 2016 #40

I find gross hyperbole goofy. Do you have any evidence to back up the claim that Green Peace has Chathamization Jul 2016 #41

You might want to look further into the history of Greenpeace on this issue. HuckleB Jul 2016 #42

It doesn't look like Greenpeace was responsible for Zambia's decision, so I'm not sure what your Chathamization Jul 2016 #47

"Responsible." HuckleB Jul 2016 #48

"Greenpeace has since published a letter that it sent African governments at the time encouraging Chathamization Jul 2016 #49

Much too late, and Greenpeace still lied about non-existent "fears." HuckleB Jul 2016 #53

So you have no evidence that Greenpeace had any influence on Zambia's decision Chathamization Jul 2016 #54

If you want to ignore the evidence, you can go ahead and do so. HuckleB Jul 2016 #55

Again, do you have any evidence showing Greenpeace influenced Zambia's decision, or that Zambia's Chathamization Jul 2016 #58

Again, you keep ignoring the evidence. That's your choice. HuckleB Jul 2016 #59

None of the links you posted even make those claims, which is why you haven't quoted from them Chathamization Jul 2016 #60

All 100 so-called "scientists" are on the wrong end .. ananda Jul 2016 #43

Go, Greenpeace! Keep ignoring science! Keep working to harm people and the planet! HuckleB Jul 2016 #44

"So-called"? YoungDemCA Jul 2016 #46

They Give The Nobel Prize in Medicine and Chemistry. . . ProfessorGAC Jul 2016 #52

Thank Jeebus you're around to keep track of who is and who is not really a scientist. Act_of_Reparation Jul 2016 #56

The Green Movement has a really bad issue with knee-jerk Ludditism. Odin2005 Jul 2016 #50