Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (3405)	1/27/2010 5:16:41 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

<How do you determine whats bad science and what isn't?> You study it. Nice non-answer. Have you studied this and what did you find that allowed you to make the determination? .... why don't you go see what kind of scientific data is needed for putting additives (incl GMO) in food... NOT DRUGS... food. Another confirmation you aren't able to explain how you determine bad science. ------------------------------------------- Then go look at the data surrounding evolutionary theory. NO BRAINER... which is probably why you would retort about favoring the food over evolutionary science... you don't use your brain (apparently). Too bad you can't explain the connection you imagine between "the food" and evolutionary science or evolutionary theory. ------------------------------------------- <Have you studied this and what did you find that allowed you to make the determination?> Of course... I don't shoot from the lip like you. <You could simply identify what you object to without the melodrama. > The original proposition... untill you compare the science between the two you'll never know. The only melodrama here is YOU claiming to favor one science over another as you clearly know NOTHING of evolution or FDA. Apparently you understand NOTHING about either subject. You DO shoot from the lip - in fact thats all you do. You can't explain anything about your beliefs or what you claimed to study. ------------------------------------------- You don't even believe in evolution, because you think the biblical version is correct.... so what point would there be in pointing out (the reams) of science supporting it? Even were I a Bible literalist, what would that have to do with GMO food or your inability to explain what you believe about it and why? ------------------------------------------- <Problem is I did and do know that DNA is patented.> Clearly... Okay, now you've contradicted one of your earlier posts. ------------------------------------------- ... and yet you continue to make the above assertion without knowing WTF is going on. Sort of - I continue to ask your what your objection is and what its based on and you continue to be unable to do that. -------------------------------------------- <That isn't the issue.> It's a HUGE issue.... it's the basis of GMO foods as well as many other (future) products... for example: Do you think it makes sense for a person (or group... ie. company) to own gods design?? You haven't established this has happened or is happening in regard to food. But lets pass over that for now. Another question for you: Is it wrong for a drug company to patent a drug (say an antibiotic) even though that antibiotic may exist in nature (ie some ant or plant produces it)? Or consider chemicals, say that are used in plastics production, if such chemicals may exist in nature - is a patent there wrong? Or an industrial designer, say another Buckminster Fuller, who develops designs for use in architecture or manufacturing that are like designs in nature, where the design has another function - is that wrong? What if a drug company develops a vaccine for HIV thats based on something that gives apes immunity to HIV/SIV - is a patent on that wrong?