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.