(cache) mem_somervilleがPoisoned Fields - Glyphosate, the underrated risk? (2016)について記入したコメント

Poisoned Fields - Glyphosate, the underrated risk? (2016) (youtube.com)

ragecry が 1日前投稿

トップ新着論争中古い順 Q&A

あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]mem_somerville 18ポイント19ポイント20ポイント 1日前 (32子コメント)

[+]ragecry[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-17ポイント-16ポイント-15ポイント 1日前 (31子コメント)

[–]Decapentaplegia 17ポイント18ポイント19ポイント 1日前 (2子コメント)

[+]ragecry[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-13ポイント-12ポイント-11ポイント 1日前 (1子コメント)

[–]Decapentaplegia 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 1日前 (0子コメント)

[–]mem_somerville 8ポイント9ポイント10ポイント 1日前 (25子コメント)

[+]ragecry[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-11ポイント-10ポイント-9ポイント 1日前 (24子コメント)

Clicking someone's name is stalking? It's on the first page of your comment history. Nice try with the cherry picking claim.

What I'm saying is this. You are a pseudoskeptic, a denialist and possibly an Agent of Doubt. You didn't watch the documentary, instead you attacked it as being a mental illness and quacky BS. These are farmers, public officials and scientists you're talking about. Who are you to speak on behalf of their credentials?

The problem with science is people like you who want to stifle important research on things that could affect our health. Yet you support stupid experiments like kick-starting Karl von Mogel and Kevin Folta's public GMO corn experiment? My goodness. A marvel of scientific achievement this one must be.

It's obvious you collude with /r/GMOMyths to cast doubt on the kind of research and precautionary principles reflected in this documentary. That group even goes so far as to villainize the scientists attempting to do this research. During my research into GMOs I have seen you all over the web commenting on articles. One of the places I've seen you often is Biofortified, an industry front for GMOs and biotech, where you can find "public scientists" like Kevin Folta propping up the GMO industry with his bias, his laundered Mon$anto money, and his silly public corn feeding experiments. Yes, you run alongside this group, we know.

Does your career rely on or support GMOs and biotech? Just curious...

[–]XM525754 14ポイント15ポイント16ポイント 1日前 (12子コメント)

[+]ragecry[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 1日前 (11子コメント)

[–]XM525754 10ポイント11ポイント12ポイント 1日前 (10子コメント)

Real science is not disseminated via video documentaries. It is done via a system that permits those interested to examine the data sets, the methodology and how the conclusions are drawn. Material like this is propaganda and little else. On top of which, not only have I done this for research in this area, but by education and vocation, I am qualified to pass judgement, and I have found it wanting. (No I do not work in industry any more, nor did I ever in this area.) On the other hand I strongly suspect you do not have the necessary grounding or you wouldn't be using this item to argue your case. Given that - why should I treat it (or you) seriously ?

Given that the whole purpose of this sub is to denounce this sort of nonsense, I also have to wonder why you bother to post it here. Surely you didn't expect it to be accepted at face value?

[–]ragecry[S] -1ポイント0ポイント1ポイント 1日前 (9子コメント)

[–]XM525754 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 1日前* (8子コメント)

[–]ragecry[S] -4ポイント-3ポイント-2ポイント 1日前* (7子コメント)

Funny you'd mention that, because there is a study that was discredited by Monsanto (no surprise) which shows a large portion of women may have glyphosate in their breast milk. You should give the documentary a watch, they cover this one too. It's not difficult to look up the names of the scientists and studies mentioned in the documentary, they are openly available on the internet.

The only person struggling here is you, in your attempt to rationalize the very reasons you can't bring yourself to watch something that might disagree with and/or destroy your worldview. But you have no problem trying to discuss something you didn't watch. Strange mental gymnastics or something.

Why should I watch it when the point of this sub is to disclaim stuff like this?

That is literally your reasoning. I'm sorry but I thought this was /r/skeptic not /r/ignorance. What exactly is the point of this sub? It seems to be a dumping zone for industry apologism.

Define skeptic:

skep·tic

a person inclined to question or doubt all accepted opinions.

Define skeptical:

skep·ti·cal

not easily convinced; having doubts or reservations

These definitions on the surface might appear to be what you're doing, by disclaiming things such as the documentary I've shared. But you're doing it blindly, without knowing the content or having anything to debate. These are signs of a pseudoskeptic, someone who is strongly rooted in their beliefs and opposes all other views, someone who likes to defend the establishment. Why aren't you a skeptic of your own views? A true skeptic would doubt the safety of GMOs and glyphosate when presented with the type of information in the documentary, not doubt the information. You are acting emotional before considering evidence.

Fake Skeptics & The "Conspiracy Theorist" Slur

"Real skepticism is a virtue."

/r/AgentsOfDoubt

このスレッドの続きを見る

[–]Decapentaplegia 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 1日前 (1子コメント)

[–]ragecry[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 1日前 (0子コメント)

[–]mem_somerville 7ポイント8ポイント9ポイント 1日前 (2子コメント)

[–]Autoxidation 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 56分前 (1子コメント)

[–]mem_somerville 1ポイント2ポイント3ポイント 33分前 (0子コメント)

[–]AmorDeCosmos97 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 1日前 (4子コメント)

[–]shoe788 9ポイント10ポイント11ポイント 1日前 (0子コメント)

[–]ragecry[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント0ポイント 23時間前 (2子コメント)

Your insecurity about being called a shill when you haven't been called one is impressive. Do you always inject emotional responses at a random point in the conversation?

Notice almost everyone in /r/skeptic supports GMOs? You might want to chew on that for awhile and think about it.

I've pondered it. Now chew on these for a while.

"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to reform (or pause and reflect)."

-Mark Twain

"I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way."

-Michael Crichton

"Misguided good men are more dangerous than honest bad men. It is because they are seen as good that, in and by good conscience, the mob will always, stubbornly back them without question."

-Criss Jami

"The existence of a majority logically implies a corresponding minority."

-Philip K. Dick

"Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it."

-Leo Tolstoy

"When you're the only sane person, you look like the only insane person."

-Criss Jami

"I don't imagine you will dispute the fact that at present the stupid people are in an absolutely overwhelming majority all the world over."

-Henrik Ibsen

[–]ProudNZ 3ポイント4ポイント5ポイント 18時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]iREDDITandITsucks 2ポイント3ポイント4ポイント 16時間前 (0子コメント)

[–]kjhvm 4ポイント5ポイント6ポイント 13時間前 (0子コメント)

Hi ragecry, I'm Karl Haro von Mogel, the Science & Media Director for Biology Fortified, and co-PI of the "silly public corn feeding experiments." You claimed above that Biofortified is an industry front group, however our organization has remained independent from the industry since our website went online in 2008. We exist to educate people about the science and encourage civil dialog. While it does not appear that anyone here was convinced by your aspersions, I want to make the record clear for you so that you know that these claims of yours are false and you can correct yourself in the future.

As far as stifling research, I find it strange that in the same breath you denigrate a public, transparent, and engaging experiment to test one of the claims about GMOs that is often repeated by its most vocal critics. I can't even find a single prominent critic of GMOs who will criticize their own side for making the claim that animals avoid GMOs. Yet, it is a very simple experiment to do and to verify whether or not it is true. Today, I shared the corn genotypes with the mother of a young girl who made it her science fair project. There are kids around the country who are learning how science works (or doesn't work sometimes) and coming up with their own ways to test the question while participating in a massive experiment with everyone else!

If the corn gets eaten equally, we disprove a myth and we win. If the corn gets eaten unequally, we discover something new and we win. If none of the corn gets eaten and the data doesn't show anything at all, we still got hundreds of adults and thousands of kids to become involved in learning about how science works, and we win.

You can win, too. If you are in the US or Canada, I'll send you a free kit so you can see the experiment for yourself, and show everyone here that you can do science and care about the process. If you are interested, shoot me an email at karl@biofortified.org and we'll arrange for an address for me to send it to - it can be a friend's address so you can keep your anonymity. You would be silly NOT to join us. You've got nothing to lose except your preconceptions about us and about science itself.

[–][削除されました] 21時間前 (1子コメント)

[removed]

[+]ragecry[S] スコアが基準値未満のコメント-6ポイント-5ポイント-4ポイント 21時間前 (0子コメント)

π Rendered by PID 6180 on app-277 at 2016-03-17 22:33:37.241163+00:00 running 9a15abe country code: JP.

skeptic

Click this link to Read the Rules

Want to help out? Click here to apply to be a moderator.

"If this type of content begins to dominate the subreddit, how would I feel?"

調停者