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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (131883)	9/6/2012 10:51:27 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

Hi Bilow, Don't assume I'm like you, Carl, and ignore the questions of others. For the record, I'm not your slave that has to answer your questions while you ignore 15 of mine. I'm not sure that is obvious to you, so I'll point that out up front. With that out of the way, the elephant in the middle of the room is to force companies like Monsanto to accept being proud of their products by forcing them to stop hiding their products and to label their UNTESTED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION (the corporations REFUSE to test the food for long term human health - which would be their best marketing point if they weren't hiding this information, but will spend $10s of millions to lobby for an ignorant populace) GMO pesticide and herbicide resistant (RoundUp Ready saturated) food. That means a "yes" vote on California's Prop 37. I'm sure some people hate free people making educated choices like Big Bio, Big Chem and Big Agra, but if you aren't one, that proposition is where the rubber hits the road. Unlike you, I like sharpening my knowledge through debate and analyzing source documents so that I can gain a better understanding of the objective reality, so I'll play your self centered game of "answer my questions while I ignore your questions." The worst part of this is that you provide no source documents - perhaps you never learned that the research comes before the conclusion and those who hide research either don't have it or disrespect their audience by wasting everyone's time. People use GMOs for different reasons and they refuse to use GMOs for different reasons. 1. Many of the Big Agra companies are aligned with Big Bio. Essentially, both are subdivisions of Big Finance Capital - so if Big Finance Capital's agenda is to push their corporate owned (often suicide - repeat business) seeds onto a population, then their Big Agra subdivision will surely play along. 2. There was a multi-billion dollar push in order to sell and promote the move to corporate owned GMO (often suicide) seeds. When billions are used to get people to "bite," some will "bite." Promises were made and incentives were given in order to entice commitments. "GMO shock and awe," as it were. 3. Big Bio is using the court system to attack non-GMO producers. Big Finance Capital has rigged the game so badly that if GMO seed blows onto an organic farm, Big Bio can file a patent infringement claim on the non-GMO crops, win and destroy the crops on the organic farm. Big Finance Capital Fascism at its best. The World According to Monsanto youtube.com The Future of Food topdocumentaryfilms.com 4. In some situations, GMO crops produce better yields. In other cases, they do not. The corporate shill talking point will simply shill for the agenda. You have to go to the data. The Union of Concerned Scientists' 2009 report Failure to Yield concluded... "For years the biotechnology industry has trumpeted that it will feed the world, promising that its genetically engineered crops will produce higher yields. That promise has proven to be empty, according to Failure to Yield, a report by UCS expert Doug Gurian-Sherman released in March 2009. Despite 20 years of research and 13 years of commercialization, genetic engineering has failed to significantly increase U.S. crop yields." I mentioned this report in a previous response to Carl's and the corporate shill's claims that yields are dramatically better with GMO crops. Carl ignored it. From the Summary Issue Briefing... For the answer, the Union of Concerned Scientists carefully examined the industry’s record in the United States, where GE crops have been commercially grown since the mid-1990s and where the best and most exten-sive data are available. ... As described in our report, Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops, we found that since the commercial introduction of GE food crops in the United States: • Herbicide-tolerant (HT) GE soybeans and corn have not increased yields any more than conventional methods that rely on commonly available herbicides. • Insect-resistant Bt corn varieties have provided an average yield advantage of just 3–4 percent compared to typical conventional practices, including syn-thetic insecticide use. • Meanwhile, non-GE plant breeding and farming methods have increased yields of major grain crops by values ranging from 13–25 percent. ucsusa.org The Union of Concerned Scientists' complete Failure to Yield report can be found here... ucsusa.org Essentially, what Carl is doing, probably completely unbeknownst to himself, is manipulating the context of the argument and spreading corporate sponsored lies (propaganda) in order to promote something under false pretenses. Specifically, Carl exhibits the traits associated with a person who has fallen for the age old logical fallacy of "Appeal to Authority." He's heard a talking point from an "authority" he mistakenly trusts and is embraced by the media and so he's confident the "authority's" assertion is correct and so he simply repeats what he heard. Monsanto has already been busted lying to everyone about all sorts of things - and GMO isn't any different. If you trust the Big Finance Capital controlled Federal Reserve System, then suck on up to Monsanto and friends and trust them with your children. Even though Monsanto has already been busted manipulating the media to lie to "news" consumers and the news media sued for the legal right to lie through their teeth to their viewers. Unsettling Accounts (The Corporation documentary) youtube.com Vandana Shiva is an excellent spokesperson explaining the myriad of reasons why GMO foods are bad for farmers outside the Big Finance Capital multinationals and for consumers. Vandana Shiva - The Future of Food and Seed youtube.com I asked Carl to support his position and he's refused to do so, while claiming that failing to answer his question meant that I agreed with him. If avoiding a state of chronic hypocrisy means anything to you Carl, please answer these questions that you've previously ignored. >>8. Please cite an independent source's study that concludes that GMO crops increase yield. Please cite the best counter argument. Which side do you conclude is correct and why? Why, specifically, is the Union of Concerned Scientists' 2009 report Failure to Yield wrong in its conclusion that GMO crops didn't definitively increase yield?<< Vote Yes on California's Prop 37. If you aren't registered because you realize the system is rigged, register, vote yes on Prop 37 and then leave the "democratic theater station.

To: Bilow who wrote (131883)	9/7/2012 1:50:32 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Respond to of 132070

"Robyn shares her personal story and how it inspired her current path as a "Real Food" evangelist. Grounded in a successful Wall Street career that was more interested in food as good business than good-for-you, this mother of four was shaken awake by the dangerous allergic reaction of one of her children to a "typical" breakfast. Her mission to unearth the cause revealed more about the food industry than she could stomach, and impelled her to share her findings with others. Informative and inspiring." TEDxAustin Robyn O'Brien 2011 youtube.com $30-40-50+ MILLION to hide their products by fighting labeling... $0 spent on long term human studies.