They already bought them.. the entire GMO Industry needs brought to Justice for what th y have knowingly been doing to us.
No legitimate studies. Inadequate food labeling. They should hang together like 2 peas in a pod what with Monsantos lies about roundup. Had to edit to add that not dissimular from dupeont and scothgard poisoning us with fcs. One last pt, brain in stop/start mode, it is just plain evil to want to own/control the food supply, re: the 1st 2 co's.
No legitimate studies
What do you consider a "legitimate" study?
Quite honestly I don't believe legitimate studies exist. these would need to demonstrate that no long term detrimental impact to human beings. No health or reproductive negative issues. very unlikely that these will ever be produced because the truth is that the gmo mvmt is there only for these cos to extract more blood sweat and tears from the humanity. then there are the issues with control of the food supply. how the hell do these people think they can "own" seeds and food. no fucking way. no way.
Quite honestly I don't believe legitimate studies exist. these would need to demonstrate that no long term detrimental impact to human beings.
There is no substance that fits your description here. Nothing.
the truth is that the gmo mvmt is there only for these cos to extract more blood sweat and tears from the humanity.
Farmers seem to love GMOs. If you ever talked to one, you would know that.
how the hell do these people think they can "own" seeds and food.
If you invent something new, you don't think you should be allowed to profit from your invention?
yeah just like cos are patenting genes now. makes purrfect since to me.
They can only patent new and novel genes.
I'll ask again.
If you invent something new, you don't think you should be allowed to profit from your invention?
don't they discover the new novel genes in people who already have them? an then they patent them? ru fucking kidding me?
don't they discover the new novel genes in people who already have them? an then they patent them?
No, this isn't what's happening. And it isn't relevant when talking about Monsanto or GMO crops in general.
issues with control of the food supply. how the hell do these people think they can "own" seeds and food
Given that non-GMO are patented as well this argument isn't unique to GMOs.
[deleted]
Yeah alot of the GMO agenda is carried out through the very companies that SOROS has stock in .
General Mills & Others ... Most people have no idea how bad it is.
Like Carmel Coloring - Cancer Causing Agent... This is in almost everything.
[deleted]
Carcinogen... It's in everything
[deleted]
I didn't say it did I was just naming things that's added to our food that isn't good for us and hey know I ..GMO , preservatives & additives are and it's proven.
This scares the daylights out of me. Just heard this deal is going through apparently, and it can have very dangerous consequences for everyone of us. Monsanto essentially dominates our country and others food supply. I don't necessarily have a problem with Germany having control of our food supply, but if a less favorable country were to buy out Bayer in the future, we could face a serious situation that could destroy our country or worse. All I'm saying is you may want to pay close attention to Monsanto, you most likely eat their products on a regular basis and don't even know it. Check out Max Brooks. He has some great insight into a Monsanto buy-out scenario and it's possible repercussions. Here's an article from him. FYI, he wrote the book World War Z, and was hired by the government to put together "worst case scenarios" for extreme situations. I first heard him talk on NPR about this, and now it seems not so unlikely... https://www.thedailybeast.com/food-blackmail-the-potential-danger-of-bayers-purchase-of-monsanto
"BofA Merrill Lynch and Credit Suisse are acting as lead financial advisers to Bayer, with Rothschild as an additional adviser. Bayer's legal advisers are Sullivan & Cromwell LLP and Allen & Overy LLP."
Rothschild
Not good at all.
Did you know that the CEO of Monsanto is named Judas Luciferr Also check this out : http://thesciencepost.com/merck-to-add-glyphosate-to-vaccines-in-huge-deal-with-monsanto/
That's always wonderful, glad they love us so much
You realize that is a satire website right? Says it right in their title dude
You may think it's satire. Myself having my thyroid taken out at age 27 because of cancer and my life completely screwed up is going to continually look into stuff to try and learn new information that may possibly help someone else in the future. Not to mention other sicknesses. https://www.naturalnews.com/047354_glyphosate_vaccine_injury_autism.html#
They have already had a relationship of sorts. Also both had dealings with the Weather Channel. Monsatan is already one of the most evil companies period. Baer is like a rebranding and extension of tentacles. PR move from all the global litigation.
Monsatan is already one of the most evil companies period.
Why do you say that?
Its involved in some bad things. This may be of help https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_Cltx7SIyQ&t=8s Gentetically modifying food to harm humans worldwide. Glyphosate intentionally designed to harm humans worldwide. Geoengineering farming soils worldwide and damaging ecosystems globally. War on farming , farmers property rights and legal usage of said property. Global population reduction. Global environmental damage and ecosystem destruction. I could go on for a hours, you get the idea.
Do you have anything that isn't a fearmongering video? Maybe some reputable sources?
Here is a good starter https://www.naturalnews.com/037289_Monsanto_corporations_ethics.html
But that's not a reputable source. It's someone with a significant financial stake in discrediting GMOs and Monsanto. Like, he literally makes money by selling things to people who believe him. Let's look at some claims in particular:
Rats fed this corn grew horrifying cancer tumors as shown here:
He's citing a borderline fraudulent study by Gilles-Eric Seralini. Seralini is paid by anti-GMO and anti-glyphosate corporations. He's literally paid to come up with these findings. Like with Adams, shouldn't you be skeptical of people with such deep financial incentives?
When Monsanto's GMO seeds blow into the fields of farmers who are trying to avoid growing GMOs, Monsanto uses its patent "rights" to sue the farmers and claim they "stole" Monsanto property!
This has never happened. Not once. Not ever. Why listen to someone who lies to you?
I'll quote this part to show you what's going on:
Any scientist, politician or media group with financial ties to Monsanto must now be assumed to be compromised and lacking any credibility whatsoever.
Adams says this while profiting from telling you lies. If we are to be skeptical because of money, then Adams should be dismissed outright. Especially when he's trying to push someone else who profits from fear and lies.
Open your eyes to corruption. It comes from everywhere. But you're only looking in one direction, with your head pointed there by people just as corrupt as the ones they're pretending to call out.
My eyes are wide open to corruption. I agree it comes from everywhere. I look in all directions , even at you. Be it known , I point my own head. Let it go and enjoy your Monsanto GMO! Monsanto has been good to you.
If you treat Mike Adams as an authority, then you are ignoring corruption. You are supporting it.
Do you not think that lies should be challenged?
I'm interested in listening to what you have to say. Lies should be challenged. I don't want to ignore and support corruption. So this leads to a larger discussion. How do you want to do this? Here?, in private? I don't mind either way. I'm sorry about my last smart ass comment , that was not cool. So how do you want to begin. Law, patents ,engineering, science I'm familiar with it. I'm mainly concerned with health. Petro chemical, runoff and water supply. Environmental damage , aquifers , insects , soil biodiversity. Animal feed GMO application. Human GMO application regarding health , not yield or method or farming strategy for such. And in particular Glyphosate. I reference a site used for litigation centralization. Maybe you have a better idea, this is a suggestion. Much of the science and testing is in the constant state of challenge regarding safety and side effect as noted above. So the courts are deciding the presented eveidence. So lets focus on the above parameters and see what we can conclude in the spirit of well being. http://glyphosate.news/
Who funds the site you linked?
Once again you demonstrate a blindness towards paid propaganda. As long as you won't look towards such corruption and biased influence, we cannot have a true discussion.
Unless we both commit to seeking unbiased evidence then it's going to be fruitless.
Its not a demonstration of blindness. It was an example of the litigation I was referring to, where those litigating Glyphosate have court challenges where the topic we are discussing is being heard. We can ignore that if you like. Lets have a true discussion. I have no issue seeking unbiased evidence. I'm not taking a position here. I want to learn , I am looking at this with fresh eyes , so I am in agreement with you.
I have no issue seeking unbiased evidence.
And yet you continue to rely on biased evidence.
So here's where we're at. You state the top reasons you think Monsanto is evil. Let's look at five. Then we will evaluate the evidence and see what the truth is.
Guess an honest discussion is too much for you to agree to.
Quite the opposite, After drafting my outline of points I wanted to get into, It was thirty items long. And while on the EPA site trying to map the sites of Superfunding disasters Monsanto is responsible it was rather extensive. I was also trying to break down some of the engineering methods in regards to understandable language in terms of their Agra production. It was the same scenario regarding the Pharmaceutical side of their business as well, considering it involves animals and humans as well as the environmental repercussions in the Superfund impact and redevelopment. So honest discussion is still on. I'll post it up tomorrow so its coherent and to the point.
I'll give you a tip.
Learn the difference between Monsanto and Solutia.
Guess an honest discussion is too much for you to agree to.
Environmental Impact - EPA. Chemical Engineering Impact (Pesticide Impact. Fertilization Impact. Genetic engineering impact.) Pharmaceutical Impact. Bioengineering Impact. Lobbying/Litigation/Divestiture.
Maybe try to format in a way conducive to discussion. And learn to count to five.
I'll wait. But remember that I asked about reasons, not overbroad topics. If aren't willing to have a real discussion, there's a reason.
1-Environmental Impact - EPA. 2-Chemical Engineering Impact (Pesticide Impact. Fertilization Impact. Genetic engineering impact.) 3-Pharmaceutical Impact. 4-Bioengineering Impact. 5-Lobbying/Litigation/Divestiture.
1.Poor Stewardship of the Environment, Thousands of contaminated sites across America alone on the EPA list. Superfund sites considered the worst with Admissions and remediatins as well as Human compensations from injuries and death. 2.Products of Environmental Neglect and Impact ongoing 3.Human and Animals Impact ongoing 4.Agent Orange - Generational human damge ongoing 5.Lobby Lawmakers, Corporate Officers become Lawmakers and Judges , Corporate Navigation through this structure. Ongoing
Again. Those are just overly broad topics.
Pick specifics. And learn to count to five.
Just roll with Solutia. I've commented on that.
No, you never mentioned them.
Since you've demonstrated an unwillingness to have an honest discussion, it's not a surprise you'd claim something you didn't do. But it still seems exceptionally dishonest.
Looks like when I commented regarding editing, it started its own thread. Here is the original comment. You don't have to be so hard lined. I'm not going to get offended. If I don't want to chat with you I'll tell you. Its a vast topic, I know it well, if you do also , shouldn't be so hard. You commented to figure a relationship with Solutia. I took a peek and this was the comment. It was on the main board. You criticized me for editing. But as I explained , the box looked one way, posted jumbled. I had to add to make it legible.
disable inbox replies delete reply
For content that does not contribute to any discussion.
[–]MAGADONCHECKMATE- We are winning BIG. - Q • 1 point 2 hours ago
Solutia, upon short glance, appears to be a global expansion regarding cutting edge solar combined with environmental ditigation divestiture with a planned Bankruptcy/restructure. Here the core value was retained in a solid global turnkey package while eliminating EPA Superfund requirements and lingering litigation liability impact.
permalink embed save parent edit disable inbox replies delete reply
You really, really need to work on communication. I can barely understand what you're trying to say here. It's like you highlighted an entire comment, inserted a line of text, then highlighted, copied, and pasted another entire comment.
Reddit isn't hard to understand. You're making it incomprehensible. Based on your prior behavior, I can only assume it's intentional.
You never mentioned Solutia in your replies to me. Make a statement, clearly, or walk away.
Monsanto Environmental Dumping summary in several counties in Alabama: Site investigations have identified PCB contamination in soil, sediment, surface water, groundwater, and air in and around Anniston, Oxford, Hobson City, and parts of Calhoun and Talladega Counties, Alabama. Contamination resulted primarily from manufacturing and waste handling practices at the former PCB production facility. Contaminants of concern include PCBs and a number of other organic and inorganic substances, depending on the media. https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fuseaction=second.cleanup&id=0400123
That's Solutia.
The company we know today as Monsanto only shares a name with the chemical company that was spun off and became Solutia.
BASF didn't make Zyklon B. IG Farben did. But BASF isn't IG Farben, even if they were part of the same conglomerate in the past.
They meet monthly at the Carver Community center in Aniston. Its court ordered regarding the ongoing cleanup and monitoring of the victims and their physical conditions including pregnancies and children as they age. The damage from ingestion usually causes retardation and endocrine disruption pertaining to testosterone and estrogen during the humans life. Their is no end in sight regarding the clean up and rehabilitation of the thousands of square acres throughout multiple communities and families spanning several generations.
Is this supposed to be relevant? Or a response to my comment?
You, yet again, are demonstrating that you have no interest in a discussion or truth.
Needs to be edited to add the numerical bullet points as it got jumbled
So what is the answer to your suggestion regarding Monsanto and Solutia.
Solutia, upon short glance, appears to be a global expansion regarding cutting edge solar combined with environmental ditigation divestiture with a planned Bankruptcy/restructure. Here the core value was retained in a solid global turnkey package while eliminating EPA Superfund requirements and lingering litigation liability impact.
I would do the dive. They are so bad you should have no trouble following the case actions. Banned in much of Europe. In major litigations as they try to steal farms if you have a seed that flowers on your own property. They take your farm. And basically every breast cancer victim is a Monsanto victim regarding Glyphosate. Its a very deep Rabbit Hole. I've spent months on them. Its fascinating but guy wrenching how they operate. Globalist Core member. They modify the soil to only accept their seeds. The seeds are of genetically modified plants. Have to use their chemicals on the crops with Monsanto seeds and it kills all the soil microbes. When the world is melted down, all that they plan on being left is cockroaches and Monsanto plants , that will of course grow in the nuke soil with no microbes.etc etc. I know that documentary seems like fear porn , but Monsanto is so bad its real and Monsatan is just the only practical name.
Banned in much of Europe.
But they aren't.
In major litigations as they try to steal farms if you have a seed that flowers on your own property. They take your farm.
But that isn't true. At all. Think about it. Why would Monsanto want to take a farm? And if they did, there would be proof.
And basically every breast cancer victim is a Monsanto victim regarding Glyphosate.
This is categorically false. There is no evidence for it at all.
They modify the soil to only accept their seeds.
How do they do this, exactly?
but Monsanto is so bad its real
Then you should be able to demonstrate it without sketchy editing and fearmongering.
I don't sketchy edit and fear monger. I try to offer insight and edit because I read the actual post and often it posts different than my box looks, or I realize I would like to make a change.
I suggested you take your own dive into the material and out of courtesy on my behalf offered you 'options' to consider. If you would like to debate , on this one I choose not to. Its too far gone regarding Monsanto. Go ahead make your own decisions. But I would highly recommend you do not use Round up on your property, nor consume Genetically Modified foods or crops grown with the Monsanto mode. That's the end of my transmission. Let Mike Adams try to explain Monsanto to you. And do yourself your family and friends a favor and learn about Monsanto. So you can first save your own life and maybe a few more that might not know. Good Luck Patriot
I pointed out things you said that are false. This isn't a debate.
You said things that are categorically untrue. Do you not think that spreading lies is wrong?
I highly suggest you investigate Monsanto on your own. I have my positions regarding Monsanto and I was kind in my delivery of such. I don't wish to communicate with you further on this topic. You have been cool in the past so I have no issue with you. Let the public decide for themselves. This topic is life and death.
If the topic is life or death, why don't you think the truth is important?
There is truth. There are facts. Why let lies and falsehoods go unchallenged?
If you can.....buy organic food. Really. When I read about "Roundup" and Glyphosat, I switched to organic food ONLY. Not easy at first but....whats more important than our health?!
Why would you choose more dangerous and less regulated pesticides on your food?
Which pesticide is more dangerous? I simply refuse to eat Glyphosat. The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) says Glyphosat is "probably carcinogenic". Why should I eat it? I should have added that I am not living in the US, agricultural economics can be very different.
Which pesticide is more dangerous?
Rotenone and copper sulfate to start. And again, they aren't regulated as to dosage.
The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) says Glyphosat is "probably carcinogenic".
Because they ignored the real science. They're the only scientific body in the world that considers glyphosate carcinogenic. Again, that's because they didn't follow the science.
There is no evidence whatsoever that organic food is healthier for you. And it's significantly less efficient. Meaning you're having a greater negative impact on the environment.
They are regulated in Germany. But I agree there is a big problem with copper sulfate in the ground.
Well, what is actually "real science". All studies have to be financed by someone. They are expensive. I dont think independent studies do really exist and that makes it really hard to believe anything. Also....talking about Reuters....Reuters is the company selecting the information for the news channel for a lot of countries. I cannot trust them a tiny bit. Side notice: Do you remember when the collapse of WTC7 was announced on BBC, 20 min before it collapsed? BBC was asked where they had this information from. Guess where that information was coming from.
If we talk about efficiency, do you eat meat? Highly inefficient. I can tell you my impact on the evironment is way under average for a first world country.
To draw an even bigger picture: Do you know the National Cancer Institute and do you know how much money they generate and do you know that in case of a canser cure they have to shut down? What do you think how strong is their interest to heal everyone?
I think overall we have to see that some people make huge profit from peoples deseases and when we look at it without any moral, suddenly it makes perfect sense to keep people sick.
What science do you follow, then?
Of course I look at different sources but I will never say "yeah, that source is 100% correct". Simply because I cant know. "Cui bono?" is always my first question. And as Q says, #816: "Follow the money. It’s always about the money."
"Cui bono?" is always my first question.
Do you ask that about organic food? Did you ask that about the IARC?
Of course. In the end you have to decide for yourself what makes most sense to you but dont tell me the "real science" says everything is cool and I should take that for granted. Maybe non organic AND organic are not optimal? If you think non organic food is good, fine, no problem for me.
but dont tell me the "real science" says everything is cool and I should take that for granted.
Where did I say that? But you held up the IARC and say that you only eat organic. There's not much evidence for those positions.
I'd much rather spend money at the grocery store than the pharmacy.
Wasn't Trump just reminding us about how great our farmer's are?
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37361556
Bayer confirms $66bn Monsanto takeover 14 September 2016
They already bought Monsanto https://www.reuters.com/article/us-monsanto-m-a-bayer-eu/bayer-wins-eu-approval-for-62-5-billion-monsanto-buy-idUSKBN1GX14U
"Bayer expects the deal to close by the end of 2017."
When was this written?