Chicago Fanatics Message Board
http://chicagofanatics.com/

GMO Opponents
http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=110108		 Page 6 of 7
Author:  Seacrest [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:26 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Regular Reader wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Just an FYI, but after this thread, I don't ever want to hear some of the liberals on this board come and post about how "anti-science" the right is. The left needs to clean up its own act as well if it wants to be seen as pro-science.


Noted liberal Panther Pisla...

referring to others, but of course he cites uber liberal Mother Jones. I'm sure he would never cite them in any other argument which he may find himself in.


It doesn't make his points wrong though. Which follows questioning the position of the quid pro quo of some of the academics in the area as I was referencing last night.

And fwiw, given that I'm fairly certain that most fresh produce I've eaten here in the dead of winter is likely genetically engineered, so I'm not really against them per se, just not fully trusting big Chem/Ag and their mouthpieces claiming an odd absolutist position.


Right there with you.
Author:  Panther pislA [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
My challenge to the anti-GMO crowd:

1: ask yourselves what question you want to answer via experiment
2: Do some background research (youtube videos and non-scientific journals are not research)
3: Construct your hypothesis
4: Test it via repeatable experimental methods with a control
5: Analyze your data, draw conclusions
6a: if hypothesis is proven true, report your results
6b: if your hypothesis is false, or only partially true, go back to step 3.

----

My question to you:

Are you, or is your Dad, employed by DelMonte?
nope, I'm just someone who is literate when it comes to matters of science.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You assume too much.
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 1:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Seacrest wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Better watch out JORR, any skepticism here will have you labelled anti science :lol:


I'm old enough to remember when healthy skepticism was actually part of science. :lol: :lol:

I'm old enough to remember when you said the Eucharist is proven science.


It is in Lanciano, Italy and Argentina.

You can look for yourself whenever you wish.

What is there?
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Seacrest wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Regular Reader wrote:
Better watch out JORR, any skepticism here will have you labelled anti science :lol:


I'm old enough to remember when healthy skepticism was actually part of science. :lol: :lol:

skepticism if your hypothesis is why you experiment. Once you experiment, you repeat it the experiment to see if the results are consistent.

Skepticism is fine, but if you are skeptical, then you run an experiment to test your hypothesis rooted in skepticism. Without data, you're just screaming nonsense.


Without years of experience with human consumption of GMO crops, you may be doing the same thing.

Neither of us have such experience, which is why we defer to experts who have spent their entire careers studying them.

I have read their published work and have gained an understanding of GMO's from it.

All you and others have done is shout about Monsanto. If the NASEM study was wrong, then there would be a study debunking it, but strangely no one has posted this mythical study.
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
My challenge to the anti-GMO crowd:

1: ask yourselves what question you want to answer via experiment
2: Do some background research (youtube videos and non-scientific journals are not research)
3: Construct your hypothesis
4: Test it via repeatable experimental methods with a control
5: Analyze your data, draw conclusions
6a: if hypothesis is proven true, report your results
6b: if your hypothesis is false, or only partially true, go back to step 3.

----

My question to you:

Are you, or is your Dad, employed by DelMonte?
nope, I'm just someone who is literate when it comes to matters of science.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You assume too much.

No assumption has been made here, you clearly have illustrated a lack of understanding of the basic scientific method. I'm pretty sure they teach that shit in middle schools.

There is a process and methodology to prove or disprove a hypothesis. You hypothesize that GMO's are unsafe, now go find the data from a scientist who has performed the peer reviewed research.
Author:  Don Tiny [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
You might as well ask a tree to explain fractals because the tree will respond sooner and more thoughtfully.
Author:  Joe Orr Road Rod [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
I think we have to differentiate between immediate food safety risks and long term environmental risks.
Author:  City of Fools [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
I've been to enough developing/third world countries (South Africa was the latest) and GMO crops are essential for food there. Nothing else has worked well and people are dying every day.
Author:  Don Tiny [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:32 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
City of Fools wrote:
I've been to enough developing/third world countries (South Africa was the latest) and GMO crops are essential for food there. Nothing else has worked well and people are dying every day.

Yeah, but, feelings.
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Don Tiny wrote:
You might as well ask a tree to explain fractals because the tree will respond sooner and more thoughtfully.

this debate always goes the same way as a vaccine one except replace "big agra" with "big pharma" and it's the same unsubstantiated bullshit.

It's no shock that there is a lot of cross-over between anti-vax and anti-GMO crowds
Author:  City of Fools [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Don Tiny wrote:
City of Fools wrote:
I've been to enough developing/third world countries (South Africa was the latest) and GMO crops are essential for food there. Nothing else has worked well and people are dying every day.

Yeah, but, feelings.

right. We have the luxury to consider our options. A lot of the world doesn't. Sure, Monsanto is evil. DeKalb Ag, for years did the same things Monsanto does until Monsanto bought them out, then liquidated everybody. Bad company. But GMO's themselves, they should be in play for these countries.
Author:  Panther pislA [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
My challenge to the anti-GMO crowd:

1: ask yourselves what question you want to answer via experiment
2: Do some background research (youtube videos and non-scientific journals are not research)
3: Construct your hypothesis
4: Test it via repeatable experimental methods with a control
5: Analyze your data, draw conclusions
6a: if hypothesis is proven true, report your results
6b: if your hypothesis is false, or only partially true, go back to step 3.

----

My question to you:

Are you, or is your Dad, employed by DelMonte?
nope, I'm just someone who is literate when it comes to matters of science.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You assume too much.

No assumption has been made here, you clearly have illustrated a lack of understanding of the basic scientific method. I'm pretty sure they teach that shit in middle schools.

There is a process and methodology to prove or disprove a hypothesis. You hypothesize that GMO's are unsafe, now go find the data from a scientist who has performed the peer reviewed research.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I used to perform the experiments, Chief Applesauce. Part of my worthless Psychology major and the physics/orgchem/biochem/biology portion of the pre-med course curriculum.

Fact remains, that it matters who funds the study, who performs the study, and who reviews the study, and it always will.
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:48 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Panther pislA wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
My challenge to the anti-GMO crowd:

1: ask yourselves what question you want to answer via experiment
2: Do some background research (youtube videos and non-scientific journals are not research)
3: Construct your hypothesis
4: Test it via repeatable experimental methods with a control
5: Analyze your data, draw conclusions
6a: if hypothesis is proven true, report your results
6b: if your hypothesis is false, or only partially true, go back to step 3.

----

My question to you:

Are you, or is your Dad, employed by DelMonte?
nope, I'm just someone who is literate when it comes to matters of science.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You assume too much.

No assumption has been made here, you clearly have illustrated a lack of understanding of the basic scientific method. I'm pretty sure they teach that shit in middle schools.

There is a process and methodology to prove or disprove a hypothesis. You hypothesize that GMO's are unsafe, now go find the data from a scientist who has performed the peer reviewed research.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I used to perform the experiments, Chief Applesauce. Part of my worthless Psychology major and the physics/orgchem/biochem/biology portion of the pre-med course curriculum.

Fact remains, that it matters who funds the study, who performs the study, and who reviews the study, and it always will.

The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.
Not to mention that a definitive study that GMO(and as I've said the whole concept of GMO is kind of stupid as virtually every food has been genetically modified by man) foods are dangerous would be a world changing study that would provide a whole career of awards, grants and notoriety. You would be a modern day Marie Curie.

Nothing anyone could do could stop that type of research from being done and there isn't enough money in the world to stop it if the science truly was sound about it. We saw that exact thing happen with cigarettes and we live in a time when information is now shared worldwide in seconds rather than the 1940s when they started to discover the lung cancer/cigarette link.

I don't trust Monsanto either. I think they are a terrible company. They aren't powerful enough to stop the world from discovering the truth on GMO's. It may happen one day that someone finds something but that isn't today.
Author:  Terry's Peeps [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.


I think MANY of the issues people have come from, as others said earlier in the thread, having no idea of the long-term effects from eating GMO food.

And that is not something that can be known (by BOTH SIDES) for MANY years.

I'm with Reader, JORR, and Crest in that I'm not inherently against GMOs and they are definitely helping feed a starving world. But I do not trust anyone who at this point says there are no long term negative effects.
Author:  tommy [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.


I think MANY of the issues people have come from, as others said earlier in the thread, having no idea of the long-term effects from eating GMO food.

And that is not something that can be known (by BOTH SIDES) for MANY years.

I'm with Reader, JORR, and Crest in that I'm not inherently against GMOs and they are definitely helping feed a starving world. But I do not trust anyone who at this point says there are no long term negative effects.

Seems like the long-term effects are not totally clear.

What also worries me are the environmental costs.

Feeding people sounds good, though.
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.


I think MANY of the issues people have come from, as others said earlier in the thread, having no idea of the long-term effects from eating GMO food.

And that is not something that can be known (by BOTH SIDES) for MANY years.

I'm with Reader, JORR, and Crest in that I'm not inherently against GMOs and they are definitely helping feed a starving world. But I do not trust anyone who at this point says there are no long term negative effects.

I don't think that's fair. I mean, it's still theoretically possible that the Earth doesn't rotate around the Sun. That doesn't mean that we should think there is a plausible reason to believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth or even that it's enough of a concern to worry about in a non-scientific discovery manner. Now, that's admittedly an extreme example but it's 100% true.

If we stopped all progress based on the non quantifiable chance that "Well, maybe we are wrong" then we'd slow progress to a virtual halt. That's why you go by the current best knowledge we have and continue to study it to get even more confident that we are on the right path.

As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.
Author:  Curious Hair [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.

I agree with this.
Author:  tommy [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:24 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Boilermaker Rick wrote:


As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.


that's one of them. their effects on non-human life is another.
Author:  Seacrest [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Curious Hair wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.

I agree with this.


:lol:

So, we should worry about pesticides sprayed on plants, but GMO's with pesticides in them should not be any concern..
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:35 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Seacrest wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.

I agree with this.


:lol:

So, we should worry about pesticides sprayed on plants, but GMO's with pesticides in them should not be any concern..
That's not what I said.
Author:  Joe Orr Road Rod [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:38 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.


I think MANY of the issues people have come from, as others said earlier in the thread, having no idea of the long-term effects from eating GMO food.

And that is not something that can be known (by BOTH SIDES) for MANY years.

I'm with Reader, JORR, and Crest in that I'm not inherently against GMOs and they are definitely helping feed a starving world. But I do not trust anyone who at this point says there are no long term negative effects.

I don't think that's fair. I mean, it's still theoretically possible that the Earth doesn't rotate around the Sun. That doesn't mean that we should think there is a plausible reason to believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth or even that it's enough of a concern to worry about in a non-scientific discovery manner. Now, that's admittedly an extreme example but it's 100% true.

If we stopped all progress based on the non quantifiable chance that "Well, maybe we are wrong" then we'd slow progress to a virtual halt. That's why you go by the current best knowledge we have and continue to study it to get even more confident that we are on the right path.

As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.


It is fair though. We don't know what the long term effects will be. What happens when all the corn on earth has pesticides built in and the pests have built up a tolerance to Bt? I don't think it would take much for man to create his own famine. What if we kill all the bees?
Author:  Seacrest [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Terry's Peeps wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
The organic food industry have billions more on revenue per year than Monsanto. If GMO's are truly unsafe, then surely they can fund an experiment... oh wait, they already know that no experiment can or will prove their hypothesis.


I think MANY of the issues people have come from, as others said earlier in the thread, having no idea of the long-term effects from eating GMO food.

And that is not something that can be known (by BOTH SIDES) for MANY years.

I'm with Reader, JORR, and Crest in that I'm not inherently against GMOs and they are definitely helping feed a starving world. But I do not trust anyone who at this point says there are no long term negative effects.

I don't think that's fair. I mean, it's still theoretically possible that the Earth doesn't rotate around the Sun. That doesn't mean that we should think there is a plausible reason to believe that the Sun revolves around the Earth or even that it's enough of a concern to worry about in a non-scientific discovery manner. Now, that's admittedly an extreme example but it's 100% true.

If we stopped all progress based on the non quantifiable chance that "Well, maybe we are wrong" then we'd slow progress to a virtual halt. That's why you go by the current best knowledge we have and continue to study it to get even more confident that we are on the right path.

As I said before, the main complaint about GMO's seems to be the seeds with pesticides built in. Now, that does sound scary, but it's just as scary what we spray onto the food we eat(including many organics). I think if anything we'll look back on pesticides as the issue much more than the idea of GMO's and a currently completely unknown negative health effect down the line.


It is fair though. We don't know what the long term effects will be. What happens when all the corn on earth has pesticides built in and the pests have built up a tolerance to Bt? I don't think it would take much for man to create his own famine. What if we kill all the bees?



There is no real argument with your premise.

It's why science uses lab rats.
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It is fair though. We don't know what the long term effects will be. What happens when all the corn on earth has pesticides built in and the pests have built up a tolerance to Bt? I don't think it would take much for man to create his own famine. What if we kill all the bees?
What if we banned GMO's today and we ran out of food for all but the richest countries? What if it lead to WWIII? What happens if global warming severly shrinks the land in which growing crops is possible and we have to maximize yields?

I mean, of course what you said could happen. We really never know what the future holds. All we can do is continue to study and react to it based on our best scientific answer.
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Ray!‏
@dragnut
“No GMO foods for MY family,” she said as she walked her pet wolf who’d been bred to have four inch long legs and respiratory problems.
Author:  Ogie Oglethorpe [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
As one W. Edwards Deming once said: "In God we trust, all others must bring data."
Author:  Seacrest [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It is fair though. We don't know what the long term effects will be. What happens when all the corn on earth has pesticides built in and the pests have built up a tolerance to Bt? I don't think it would take much for man to create his own famine. What if we kill all the bees?
What if we banned GMO's today and we ran out of food for all but the richest countries? What if it lead to WWIII? What happens if global warming severly shrinks the land in which growing crops is possible and we have to maximize yields?

I mean, of course what you said could happen. We really never know what the future holds. All we can do is continue to study and react to it based on our best scientific answer.



We aren't running out of food.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/22/40 ... port-says/
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:17 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Seacrest wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It is fair though. We don't know what the long term effects will be. What happens when all the corn on earth has pesticides built in and the pests have built up a tolerance to Bt? I don't think it would take much for man to create his own famine. What if we kill all the bees?
What if we banned GMO's today and we ran out of food for all but the richest countries? What if it lead to WWIII? What happens if global warming severly shrinks the land in which growing crops is possible and we have to maximize yields?

I mean, of course what you said could happen. We really never know what the future holds. All we can do is continue to study and react to it based on our best scientific answer.



We aren't running out of food.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/22/40 ... port-says/
We haven't killed all the bees either.

JORR was playing the Doomsday angle and I was simply pointing out that that the non-GMO future has Doomsday scenarios too.
Author:  Seacrest [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
I'm not sure that science saw this coming.

https://www.livescience.com/20532-birth ... ution.html

https://www.globalresearch.ca/death-and ... es/5375684

Bee populations rose in the US last year though.

http://www.newsweek.com/bees-population ... ies-645694
Author:  Brick [ Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: GMO Opponents
Seacrest wrote:
I'm not sure that science saw this coming.

https://www.livescience.com/20532-birth ... ution.html

https://www.globalresearch.ca/death-and ... es/5375684

Bee populations rose in the US last year though.
Good random links.
Page 6 of 7 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/