Coalition of the ignorant (1 Viewer)

[fugl]

Well, I don't want to continue with this either since your mind is obviously closed but I can't let your comments on 1st-world population increase stand which is entirely, or almost so, the result of 3rd-world immigration. Take that out of the equation and most 1st-world populations are stable or decreasing.

For the record, "coalition of the ignorant" quotes the article's first line and refers to the ignoramuses who think GMO food is unhealthy, not to those who object to it on other grounds.

And, yes, it's a big bad capitalist world out there, another problem we seem incapable of doing anything much about.

 

[fugl]

Not one of their best (but then there's so little GMO humor out there. . . )

http://www.theonion.com/article/crops-begin-emerging-farmlands-across-nation-monsa-52837

 

[fugl]

Zika mosquitos: artificial selection as an alternative to transgenes--

https://apple.news/A2zIXZTzWN_eQ5x-IxsNd0g

 

[Geoff WORCS]

You don't eat a diamond so it won't affect your health as genetically modified foods probably will! :eek!: Food is essential to life...material possessions are not :smoke:

The human race are fools to be walking blindfold into what could be a right Pandora's Box. We should be working with Nature, not against her!!!

Here here !
:t:

 

[fugl]

Here here !
:t:

Where's "here" and wherever it is what does it have to do with anything?

And GMO foods aren't worse for the health than other kinds of food. . ..

 

[Nutcracker]

Methinks a typo for "Hear, hear !"

 

[fugl]

Methinks a typo for "Hear, hear !"

Methought that also.

 

[fugl]

The next step. . .?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/14/s...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

 

[fugl]

GM canaries and the color red--

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/05/the-gene-that-paints-birds-red/483467/

 

[fugl]

The back story--
http://www.theatlantic.com/science/...pecies-to-change-the-color-of-another/486425/

 

[fugl]

A hundred Nobel laureates beg to differ--

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/u...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share

 

[davercox]

The "more than 100 Nobel laureates" appear to be missing the point.

They say "There has never been a single confirmed case of a negative health outcome for humans or animals from their consumption."

But the issue isn't "negative health outcomes for humans" - it's unforeseen consequences on the surrounding environment.

 

[jurek]

Golden rice in Asia and GMO in North America and Europe are two different technologies.

If these people said: stop bashing golden rice, it would be fine. If somebody says stop bashing [all] GMOs, it is red herring argument. Maybe Nobel laureates were misled, maybe their message was distorted.

 

[fugl]

. . .Maybe Nobel laureates were misled, maybe their message was distorted.

Or maybe they just haven't thought it through. . .. You know how intellectually careless and slapdash your average Nobel laureate can be when it comes to scientific questions of great public import.

 

[fugl]

? . ..But the issue isn't "negative health outcomes for humans" - it's unforeseen consequences on the surrounding environment.

Of course it is, or at least one of them. . .. Lying to people about the alleged negative health effects of GMOs can't possibly lead to anything good long term.

 

[Nutcracker]

Of course it is, or at least one of them. . .. Lying to people about the alleged negative health effects of GMOs can't possibly lead to anything good long term.

The sad problem remains that an alarmingly high % of people couldn't give a **** about damage to biodiversity, which is the real reason to oppose GMOs. So one needs some other narrative that they will take note of.

 

[fugl]

The sad problem remains that an alarmingly high % of people couldn't give a **** about damage to biodiversity, which is the real reason to oppose GMOs. So one needs some other narrative that they will take note of.

We've danced this dance before, e.g. post #42 and many others before and after in this long thread.

To reiterate. . .. Lying in a "good cause" (but I'm not sure anti-GMO is one) is all very well but only if the lie is reasonably plausible. If it isn't, boom, you've got 100+ Nobel laureates on your a**.

We're in the Anthropogene, an era of mass extinction and uncontrolled human
population growth, and there's no way we can lie (or, God help us, exhort) our way out of it.

 

[fugl]

Accentuating the positive (and about time too!). . ..

http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...uggest_a_way_forward_in_the_labeling_war.html

 

[fugl]

Indeed--

This Is Why We Embrace Genetically Modified Bugs but Disdain Genetically Modified Food - Slate
https://apple.news/AoqfIGR8iTmWwQmxh1rRc2Q

 

[Nutcracker]

One can understand why people want rid of disease-carrying mosquitos.

But those same mosquitos also underpin a large part of the food supply for insectivorous birds: go ahead with the scheme, and goodbye to warblers, gnatcatchers, etc., etc.