Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Neil deGrasse Tyson Tells GMO Critics to "Chill Out" [View all]PatSeg
(47,421 posts)180. I recently read two books
about drug companies and their deceptive practices. I'm quite sure those practices are used in other businesses as well. There appears to be a revolving door here in the U.S. between certain industries and the government agencies that supposedly regulate them. Wink, Wink!
I'm beginning to think that companies like Monsanto may also pay people to come on forums like this one to peddle their products and put out fires. There are some who doth protest too much if you know what I mean. Probably the same people who write negative reviews at Amazon for books they've never read.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
244 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
and Dr. Tyson is welcome to eat all the GMO, insecticide-laden food he wants
magical thyme
Jul 2014
#1
Exacttly, magical thyme.. no one is "infallible". I've been eating organic food for
Cha
Jul 2014
#18
It's not hypocritical; the link below describes the difference between organic farmers' use ...
Maat
Jul 2014
#126
Cherry picking, and failing to see the full consensus leads to wrong conclusions.
HuckleB
Aug 2014
#237
looking at the entire 1st page of studies returned by google is hardly cherry picking
magical thyme
Aug 2014
#239
People actually working on GMOs think that's a pretty huge distinction, but they're not celebrities
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#154
Eh...so if the "difference is large" then saying they are the same might be, I dunno, incorrect?
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#157
Except the people who work with GMOs say they do so because they can't get the same end products
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#163
Which is why “selective breeding=GMO” is as idiotic as saying “selective breeding=invasive species"
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#166
Sigh…how do you think those invasive species came about? Hand planted by god?
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#178
Differences between organism are largely the result of selective breeding. You've already stated
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#187
Occams's razor says trust pop scientists commenting on an unrelated field rather than people working
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#156
Oh, sorry. You were discussing his paper on the possibilities of gas-rich dwarf galaxies in the
Chathamization
Aug 2014
#161
That's the claim; one could also claim that professional wrestling promotes interest in exercise.N/T
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#29
Yes. Unsubstantiated claims supporting stuff I like are nothing like unsubstantiated claims
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#49
The unfounded fear is that a "GMO" is more dangerous than a "traditional" hybrid. (nt)
jeff47
Jul 2014
#65
So lateral transfer has or has not been observed in multicellular organisms?
Gormy Cuss
Jul 2014
#115
Anti-GMO and Anti-Vaccination woo is the Left's climate change denial and creationism.
DemocraticWing
Jul 2014
#11
I'm more concerned about the unintended consequences of introducing GMOs to the environment.
MohRokTah
Jul 2014
#72
I believe the distinction you're missing is that "feral" does not equal "wild..."
mike_c
Jul 2014
#35
one either respects and embraces science or one rejects it out of hand, preferring ignorance....
mike_c
Jul 2014
#34
so what do you call ignoring the reasoned, professional judgement of the majority...
mike_c
Jul 2014
#52
I would like the DUers who have a family member or friend who has been killed by GMO products
Nye Bevan
Jul 2014
#46
There's a difference between hybridization and round-up resistant soybeans.
lumberjack_jeff
Jul 2014
#61
Kudzu is fine. Human’s have been introducing “invasive species” for thousands of years. There’s no
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#63
Introduced species upset the ecological balance in a region, denying that is anti-science.
MohRokTah
Jul 2014
#69
Poe’s law. Not surprising, given the pseudo-science being spread by the pro-GMO crowd.N/T
Chathamization
Jul 2014
#82
1) to my knowledge, humans didn't traditionally hybridize corn by breeding with cyanobacteria.
lumberjack_jeff
Jul 2014
#96
We are at the stage of genetic science where drugs were at the time of thalidomide.
lumberjack_jeff
Jul 2014
#110
please explain why phylogenetic distance has any relevance to the moral issue....
mike_c
Jul 2014
#79
just about every major scientific and medical organization HAS said that GMOs are safe...
mike_c
Jul 2014
#90
actually, round up resistance more than likely WAS obtained by selective breeding....
mike_c
Jul 2014
#97
Splicing the DNA from petri dish grown cyanobacteria onto soybean DNA is just like...
lumberjack_jeff
Jul 2014
#106
I do have only one issue with his argument, traditional hybrids can't be patented...
Humanist_Activist
Jul 2014
#94
I think he just crawled under the bus and some here want to drag him back into the light of day
FiveGoodMen
Aug 2014
#226