Jeffrey Smith (Institute for Responsible Technology) Challenges Neil degrasse Tyson On GMOs

[mother earth]

Long version:

Jeffrey M. Smith is the director of the Institute for Responsible Technology and is one of the world’s leading advocates against GM foods. His book Seeds of Deception is rated the number one book on the subject and has had a substantial influence on public perception and even legislation. Smith has reached tens of millions of people through hundreds of media interviews. He produced the video Hidden Dangers in Kids’ Meals, and also writes a popular monthly syndicated column. He is on the Genetic Engineering Committee of the Sierra Club, was the former vice president of marketing for a GMO detection laboratory, and ran for U.S. Congress in his home state of Iowa to raise public awareness of the health and environmental dangers of GM foods.


Short version:

[Shivering Jemmy]

1. Unimpressed

[A Simple Game]

2. He may not have the flair Tyson has,

but he does have the facts and knowledge of the subject that Tyson doesn't have.

Tyson is used to dealing in theories, plant sciences are mostly facts.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

4. And where does his scientific knowledge come from?

Answer: Maharishi University of Management. That bastion of scientific thought. Oh wait. It's not.

However, NDT has a BA from Harvard, an MA from University of Texas Austin, and a MPhil and PHD from Columbia University.

I'd say NDT knows a lot more about plant sciences than a guy who attended a college founded in Transcendental Meditation.

[A Simple Game]

6. You don't have to be a scientist to understand genetics and traditional

plant breeding. He nor I ever said he was a scientist, but he does have knowledge about horticulture, that is obvious. Where did Tyson get his knowledge about horticulture? Other than the ferns by the entrance, a planetarium is nothing like a greenhouse.

I see by your other post that you seem to think GMO's are universally accepted, you may want to check with the EU and most of the world outside of the US about that. They don't seem to put much faith in Monsanto funded studies.

Cross breeding and grafting are not the same as genetic modifications using non-species genes and Tyson should know that as should you.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

7. I don't have any faith in woo pedlers like this guy...

And I am 100% sure Tyson knows WAY more about genetics than this asshat.

[A Simple Game]

8. Ok, I don't argue with people that use the words faith and 100% in conversations.

You do know the difference between a planetarium and a plant?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

9. Do you know the difference between a scientist and a conspiracy theorist?

It's like Ken Ham vs Bill Nye all over.

[A Simple Game]

10. Ok you got me curious, what is the conspiracy and who is in on it? n/t

[DhhD]

12. Do you know the difference between a physicist and a bio-molecular chemist who understands the

difference between promoters, introns, and triplets sets of genes, gene shapes that do work because of their shape and their resulting phenotypes? Do physicist understand the transformation between Kingdom cells? How about the ligands between proteins of chicken to the human blood cell proteins that feed human cells after chickens have been fed with BT corn? And how those transformed red blood folded proteins are sent to the liver cells for decomposition? Some physicist may need to study up. It seems apparent that NDT does understand the polyploidy of graphing. Genes may not express themselves fully; there an epigenome that remembers the past. Graphing is with like Kingdom cells of the Plantae Kingdom. This post is different in that it talks about cross transformation between cells of different Kingdoms. And I heard a short description of how glycoproteins open its host cell. That is how Ebola and other viruses carry in the, preferred nucleic proteins.

http://23bios1unsoed.wordpress.com/bahan-ajar/2-genome-anatomies/23-the-anatomy-of-the-prokaryotic-genome/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18591983

https://www.boundless.com/biology/textbooks/boundless-biology-textbook/gene-expression-16/regulation-of-gene-expression-111/prokaryotic-versus-eukaryotic-gene-expression-453-11678/

http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/rna-splicing-of-introns-exons-and-other-forms-of-rna-processing.html#lesson

The sources above are very simplified abstracts. I would say that a physicist would really have to study up before a debate; like months and months worth.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

18. And Jeff Smith is neither a physicist nor a bio-molecular chemist...

He has a degree from a TM college and his one man "organization" receives money from Natural News and Mercola. Both of which are RW quackery.

So, if a physicist would have to study for a debate, what would a guy with zero formal science training require?

[mother earth]

17. Apparently you like your woo coming from asshats like Monsanto. Tyson is an astrophysicist, this

is not his field, & apparently he's unaware of certain realities and policies. Why not have a debate? Smith is not hating on Tyson. Tyson is a good man, just uninformed as to where we are in GMO's and the implications. I'd love for these two men to get together. Much could be gained. Tyson's not an asshat, and neither is Smith.

Monsanto is all about profits at all and any risk. Sound familiar?

I've got to wonder why any DU'er could or would applaud corporate greed, applaud ignorance, and shit on safety and health?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

19. No. But I believe 1800+ INDEPENDENT studies...

And I believe the WHO, NIH, AMA, et al.

I don't believe asshats with connections to Mercola and Natural News.

Also, as I've said NUMEROUS times before (and even NDT made this point), GMO =/= Monsanto. The only people bringing Monsanto into the argument are the anti-GMOers. One can be pro-GMO and anti-Monsanto, as the two are NOT synonymous.

[truedelphi]

57. Keep believing in industry-controlled scientists. However some people

Are brave enough to defy industry's control over the matter:

NYU risk analysis professor states that GMO's have the potential to alter life as we know it

http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/06/nyu-gmos-destroy-planet/

[emsimon33]

49. Good point about Tyson's field of expertise

[truedelphi]

31. Thank you for presenting some important considerations on the subject.

One more consideration: I doubt Tyson would be able to keep his spot as science announcer extraordinaire if he renounces the big Agriculture Industry's next huge hope for control over the food market.

Whether he has botanical and horticultural knowledge or not, he understands all too well who is signing his paycheck there at FOX. And walking away from gigs like that is probably not something he would want to do.

This is a total shame, as Tyson's hero Carl Sagan had a lot of curiosity and a lot of courage, and once Sagan realized the truth of the matter, he spoke that truth, come hell or high water.

[A Simple Game]

51. Good point, I hadn't thought of the money angle. n/t

[markpkessinger]

43. Tyson is an astrophysicist -

I see nothing in his educational background that would qualify him as an authority on GMO. Medical doctors are scientists, too, as are geologists. But I don't go to a geologist for an authoritative medical opinion.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

45. Do you go to a TM guru for GMO advice? n/t

[markpkessinger]

47. I'm not suggesting Smith's view is authoritative . . .

I'm merely pointing out that merely pointing to the fact that Tyson is a 'scientist' doesn't really cut it in this discussion.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

48. No, but those belittling Tyson for being "out of his field"

or for being a paid shill for Monsanto are promoting the views of someone who doesn't even have a field, and is an OPENLY paid shill for Natural News and Mercola (neither of which are allowed on DU).

I did more than argue that Tyson is a scientist. I provided a link to over 1700 studies proving GMO safety. But that's being ignored.

[Archae]

50. Of course it's being ignored.

I just posted in the Skeptic forum a short article about the current head of the Flat Earth Society, and he uses the same tactics the anti-GMO hysterics are using, including this Natural News/Mercola whore, Smith.

Go on "gut feelings," ignore evidence that shows a belief is dead wrong, the works.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

3. And the WHO, AMA,

the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion: consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.

Not to mention 1,800+ studies done internationally that support those claims.

Versus this guy (who is not a scientist, and attended Maharishi University of Management), who runs an anti-GMO organization that has financial ties to both Mercola and Natural News.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/484/
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/tag/mike-adams/

http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-organizations/institute-for-responsible-technology-ifrt/

[mother earth]

20. Here's some info for you, FDA's Taylor worked & still works inside for Monsanto.

More here: http://www.responsibletechnology.org/healthcare-providers

In the early 1990s, the scientific consensus at the FDA was that GM foods were inherently dangerous, and might create hard-to-detect allergies, poisons, gene transfer to gut bacteria, new diseases, and nutritional problems. The FDA’s own scientists recommended rigorous long-term testing of these new foods! In a political climate that ordered the FDA to promote biotechnology, the FDA responded by recruiting Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney, to oversee the formation of GMO policy. Under White House political pressure to rush GM foods to market, the agency officials rubber-stamped research from the biotech companies like Monsanto.

Employees of the FDA, and the Biotech industry routinely switch sides.

Mr. Taylor later returned to the biotech industry to become Monsanto’s vice president and in January 2010, was appointed deputy commissioner for foods at FDA. This revolving door between government regulators at the FDA and the biotech industry allowed GE foods to enter our food supply ten years ago with virtually no safety studies or a single published, human clinical trial.

---------------

It's the fucking revolving door that is screwing with every single faction of our gov't. Is this what you as a dem, as a DU'er are about?
If so, I understand why there is no civil discussion on this topic here. You can't argue for Monsanto without knowing our own FDA is catering to Monsanto with NO scientific proof of safety, time and time again scientists that give proof of the health issues are discredited and attacked, they lose jobs over speaking out. Is this what we are about here at DU, attacking whistleblowers to schill for the oligarchs? Please do disclose why you are siding with the likes of Monsanto?

I'm not buying it's science, this is exactly the opposite.

More and more doctors are telling patients to stay away from GMO's and buy organic. They must be "anti-science" too eh? What a crock.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

21. I didn't mention the FDA.

You did. I didn't bring up Monsanto. You did.

I'm discussing GMOs. You're discussing corporate practices.

[mother earth]

23. I'm discussing what's behind GMO's & the takeover and control of the food supply. It's all

relevant, and speaks volumes about what is taking place. You can't shit on being against GMO's as woo, while you ignore the facts. Facts are powerful, don't profess to be about science and ignore them.

Several here are shitting on Smith's reputation as though GMO's are your religion. I've got to wonder why that is.

Aren't we all for science and safety when it comes to the food supply? GMO corporations are NOT conducting scientific study, they are skirting it & it's all about the inside help is it not? Who gets away with this in this country? The big corporate entities that have bought and paid for influence and dictate law.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

25. I'm shitting on Smith because he's a quack.

I support GMOs. I support the advancement of science. I will argue for them.

I don't support Monsanto. I won't argue for Monsanto.

You can't frame the narrative. It's not black and fucking white.

When it comes down to it, you are heavily defending a RWNJ who has a degree in Transcendental fucking Meditation. He's a bullshit "yogi".

[mother earth]

28. GMO's are not safe. Where is the scientific data that backs up what you are saying?

When you argue for GMO's you argue for Monsanto. They are the only game in town, it's their stage, they are framing the narrative. That's why most here have a problem with GMOs and Monsanto. We do want scientific studies, we don't want discredited scientific studies because they don't agree with the oligarch & they are bad for business.

Right wing nut job? Well, if he's a right wing nut job then good on the right wing, they finally have a good man. You are yanking straws and chains, nothing of substance is coming forth. Nada!

[Dr Hobbitstein]

37. 1800+ scientific studies say they are safe...

Those are INDEPENDENT studies, not funded by Monsanto.

How many studies show they are unsafe? None. The one that WAS out there has been WIDELY discredited.

Enjoy your RWNJ!

[Dr Hobbitstein]

39. Here's a link to an Excel spreadsheet containing 1,783 studies.

All prove GMOs are safe. Let me know if you need any more.

http://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Ge-crops-safety-pub-list-1.xls

[truedelphi]

58. Numbers do not matter. I have far more experience than you in terms

of "analyzing data."

In the late 1990's, when the people of California rose up to attempt a ban of MTBE, there were probably 3,000 studies that "proved" the safety of MTBE.

Only two studies proved that MTBE was a problem. Two!!

One was from a scientist over in Italy, and of course, his decent, independent study was denounced as scientists in other countries are always considered to be inferior to scientists here. (Never mind the past history that shows us that the following people were foreign scientists: Galileo, Newton, Copernicus, Pasteur, Curie, Einstein, Tesla, a dozen German rocket scientists we brought from Germany to the USA at the end of WWII. etc)

The second study that proved that the risk to benefit of MTBE was nil and that the toxin was, well, toxic, was the study undertaken by the Blue Ribbon Panel appointed by Gov Davis and headed by John Froines.

The people of the state of California were smart enough to know that two decent and independent studies can throw down the results of over one thousand industry controlled studies.

Of course, Gov Davis paid for ihis interfering with the wishes of the Big Oil Industry. Within months of MTBE being banned, Big Oil money ws used to see that the man was recalled, and Big oil Money went on to have Arnold Schwartzennegger put in his place.

Sometime later I put together my analysis of all the political and media-related repercussions of the MTBE Issue. My analysis can be found in the piece I posted over at Daily Kos. People who think critically can come to understand that this type of thing occurs all the time, and not only in the one single instance related to MTBE:



http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/06/22/540267/-The-TRUTH-Versus-the-Mainstream-Media

[Archae]

5. As I suspected, the guy is a kook.

Longtime follower of the Maharishi, (is on video "flying" yogically) has no scientific or other credentials.

http://academicsreview.org/reviewed-individuals/jeffrey-smith/

[DhhD]

14. Undergraduate work in Science is a great possiblity. Undergraduate degress through the College

of Arts and Sciences my be at play. Or just plain old research and study is for the opportunist who is moral and careful to be successful in important activities in life. Eating and living well are more than just a hobby to some as they seem to be concerned about their fellow man/woman.

[Archae]

15. Or simply a kook with an agenda.

His "Institute" has one person in it.
Him.

That's all.

[panfluteman]

11. What is this - a pro-GMO Troll Convention?

This guy, Jeffrey M. Smith, knows WAY more about genetics and plant science than Neil de Grasse Tyson, whose specialty is astrophysics. And the real agenda of Monsanto and the GMO companies is nothing more than to maximize their profits, no matter how much collateral damage they cause, including poor farmers in India who they seduce into a mountain of debt and slavery to Monsanto who then wind up killing themselves by guzzling Roundup herbicide; their main other objective is to gain monopolistic control over the entire food supply. I think it's morally wrong to patent and monopolize life, which should be enjoyed and accessed freely by all living beings. I wouldn't be surprised if Neil de Grasse Tyson is on the payroll of Monsanto, as buying off everyone in an influential position is another one of the GMO giant's specialties.

[DhhD]

13. Interesting thought about who might be on the bandwagon tauting ignorance. That would be those

Last edited Sat Aug 9, 2014, 11:13 PM - Edit history (1)

against siting scientific studies. Scientific facts can be reported by any person as long as they do not misrepresent the scientists of the scientific finding(s).

[mother earth]

16. You do understand he's offering a challenge of debate? Do you also understand this man may not be a

scientist, but he has documented scientists and their studies and the politics behind FDA. I applaud the man's credentials and while Tyson is a scientist, this is simply not his field. I have no doubt Tyson would be as gracious as Smith & isn't that where real discussion begins?

Perhaps you should take a lesson here. It's not about conspiracy or woo. We want real study, documented proof of safety & that has not been forthcoming from Monsanto, it's been squelched by Monsanto.

I often wonder why I bother to reply to any pro-GMO's woo peddlers here, discussion does not take place. It's all about name calling & shit kicking, with precious little to be gained.

I, for one, welcome Smith's challenge to Tyson. I've got a feeling we may be seeing debate take place soon. I hope so.
What is there to fear? Absolutely nothing. Knowledge is not conspiracy, "WOO" begins in trying to stop debate and study. Now, why would any DU'er be against that?

[Archae]

22. Science is not decided by debate.

Debating just shows who is better at arguing.

I saw a guy in debate class (High School) win a debate advocating for the death penalty for *ALL* crimes, including jaywalking.

Creationist Duane Gish used to "win" the debates he was in, with the technique that now bears his name, the "Gish Gallop."
Putting out so much crap the actual scientist was overwhelmed.

Smith may even be a good debater.
But he has no real education, and no credentials.

He has an agenda, and his "Institute" that he created that consists only of himself.

[mother earth]

26. No science is about scientific studies, archie. The ones that GMO co's are against, GMO giants like

Monsanto pay to discredit science and scientists, they have mercenaries on the payroll, they pay for disinfo, they pay for branding and attacks against people who stand up to them. You know who has an agenda, it's Monsanto & all their personas. They've got an agenda and it's PROFIT, and they do not care about collateral damage, or safety, or health or much else.

Debate is about discussion that can lead to clarifying Tyson's and Smith's stances out in the open. Smith has no education or credentials? Maybe that can be the first item to clear up for ya, eh?

Poor baby.

[Archae]

29. This is the actual scientific method...

1. Ask a question.
2. Formulate a theory.
3. Find evidence. If no evidence, or evidence shows otherwise, change or reject the theory.

Your version is nearly identical to Creationists' methods.

1. Have a supposition.
2. Find evidence to back up the supposition from "friendly" sources, like the Bible or professional deniers like Smith.
3. If evidence shows otherwise, deny or attack the evidence.

[mother earth]

34. So where are the scientific peer reviewed studies you speak of proving GMOS are safe? I didn't ask

what the scientific method is, I've asked for the cited studies. Got nothing?

Creationist methods? LOL, now I know why you ding dongs attack people who want proof of GMO safety, you are grouping us into religious fanatics, when it is actually you who are in that boat. YOU'VE GOT NO PROOF TO OFFER. Who believes in something invisible now, Archibald?

You've got nothing but an attack because you think I'm religious? Wow, are you barking up the wrong tree.

[truedelphi]

35. DU'er Mother earth did not say that the actual scientific method has no value.

I think anyone who took a halfway decent science class in middle school or high school has been taught what you posted in your reply above.

But what she is trying to relate to you, if you would let her, is that the total control of the Corporate world over the laboratories of science means that right now, "Truth" is about as likely to come out of a laboratory, as it was to come out of a pulpit, back in the days of The Holy Roman Catholic Church.

Do you wanna know why we in the USA even have GM foods seeds, and crops here in the USA, while other countries are backing away from them? It is not because of any given study, but because Monsanto's "governmental adviser" Mike Taylor, got himself a sweet position inside the Clinton Administration, and from that position, he PROCLAIMED THAT GM foods seeds and crops would produce foods that are nutritionally similar to conventional crops. This was quite early on inside the history of those seeds, crops and foods, so there was zilch in terms of scientific data. (Back in the good old days, before the Corporations took over Truth, scientists would take decades to study a situation before publishing if something was or wasn't okay. But in our modern era of corporate control, no one even needs data - they just make proclamations!)

Science by proclamation is exactly where we are right now. And what became of Mike Taylor? Currently he heads an entire division over at the FDA, as Obama is just as eager as Bill was to get handed some $ 250,000 per speech at corporate podium when he retires from the Oval Office.

[DhhD]

41. You are mistaken. I am not pro-GMO. I believe you missed my other replies on this thread. n/t

[roody]

52. I suspect that our small pro-gmo

faction is financially involved with big Ag.

[Archae]

53. Hey, you're right!

I prefer not to spend 2 or even 3 times as much money for groceries by buying "organic" labels.

Yes that is "financial involvement," not this "Pro-GMO's are Monsanto shills" conspiracy theory bullshit.

[truedelphi]

55. Yes it does seem some people are.

Other folks have, I suspect, taken one or two science classes, and want the rest of us to behold and to benefit from their remarkable hold on all things scientific.

I might be in absolute awe of such people, except that I spent some 7 years serving as a member of a small county's health council, and through that association I met scientists from all over the world. Some of these scientists were pre-eminent in their field. And yet these people had been given their pink slips from the Big Industry firms, be it BigAg, Big Pharmaceutical, etc. Most of these pre-eminent scientists were pink-slipped and then black listed, often for some very minor complaint about a product's safety.

To remain as a scientist for any Big Industry, a person has to be willing to never question anything you are being told to do, and to fudge data, alter results and plain out fabricate and lie.

And of course one reason that our Big Industries get away with this is due to the complicity of Big Mainstream Media. If you have the time, pls read this piece through. Although it centers on one toxic substance, a thinking person can extrapolate and then realize how the media mainly serves up hogwash:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/06/22/540267/-The-TRUTH-Versus-the-Mainstream-Media

[roody]

56. bookmarked to read later. Thanks.

[mother earth]

62. I absolutely agree. Your article nails the MSM. What we are dealing with at ALL levels and on just

about every issue slapping this country out of democracy is a complete corporate takeover and that includes any last shred of truth. It's all about information and disinfo. One has to follow the money trail & it is not always clear at first blush, but it always rears its ugly head along the way. When professional people from all walks of life speak out on an issue near and dear to them and add their expertise along the way, they are discredited with all forms of ridicule, hit in any "vulnerable" direction they can be hit in, whether it is of value or not, truth is collateral damage and can be twisted. Scientists are fired every day if they bravely speak out.

The aim is always to benefit the monied interest, science be damned, this is a game of lies and deception where truth can be formed to your liking.

Jon Entine is no more qualified to judge any of the scientists and activists he damns with lies and deception with his sounding "legitimacy". Yet, we don't hear about men of that ilk from the pro-GMO'ers here at DU. Somehow, the woo doesn't apply to pro-GMO, only to anti-GMO, that in itself is a clear indicator and clue to who, right here at DU, are denying science. They are embracing marketing and branding that seeks to muddy the waters and to discredit anyone who dares challenge their corporate might.

Industry knows people are getting info on the internet and no longer dependent on MSM. Truth is for sale, and internet shills and highly visible personalities, and on and on, it's a game when you've got millions to invest in swaying public opinion. We think we can trust names that sound like they are based in scientific research, i.e., The Genetic Literacy Project, only to find they are front groups, and should be rejected just like those who reject Mercola or Mike Adams, etc., this is no more than a money game. The corporation stands to profit and they don't care that they muddy the waters, hell they are going to muddy the waters all they can. Everything about their product is safe & good & just as American as mom's apple pie.

Well, when I see DU'ers believing the hype & then they have the audacity to slap others with their "woo" labels because we question the obvious, I see science denial and aiding and abetting the corporate oligarch this country has become.

I've said it before & I'll say it again, this issue cannot be tainted, that we have a right to know what is in our food supply. Just label it, as consumers we can make our own decisions from there. The FEAR of Monsanto & their many personas, and their campaign of milllions being pumped into NOT labeling tells us all we need to know, or it should. Why would anyone (especially here) be so accepting of big corporations denying us our consumer rights?

This is a game of money, the collateral damage is truth & democracy. We aren't about acceptance of that BS here at DU, at least we didn't use to be. What's changed? We now have a group of shills (and I'm not talking Tyson)....paid or otherwise, and it all points to science denial, we've been infiltrated & they want us to fall for their hype and their game.

Take the health & safety issue out of the equation, and what is left? It's a question of gov't by democracy or plutocracy.

TY, Truedelphi, for your contribution to this thread, and thank you to all who fight for truth and transparency.

[truedelphi]

63. Thank you for your kind words. I have made only the slightest bit of money

By writing the truth, exposing the truth, etc, and that usually comes in the form of someone offering to pay for a $ 35 subscription to some chemistry journal or some such that I simply cannot afford.

On the other hand, it is through knowing Marc Lappe that I found out that it is important to flush the formaldehyde out of your system the minute you come into contact with it. (I used to come into contact with formaldehyde a lot on account of it being included in the RoundUp formula, although Monsanto lied to the EPA and never told them it was part of the mix.)

So on account of Lappe's promoting the use of glutathione, I have only the most minor of MS symptoms. Lappe left this world for greener pastures about ten years ago, but his offspring created the valuable alternative news source, the Guerrilla News Network, covering topics that others won't cover.

There have been many other things I have learned about how to protect my health, through continually meeting some of those people now blacklisted by Big Pharma and Big Pesticide Industries. Researchers love to have a lab up and running - it is what they live for. So when a scientist is forced out of his or her field of research, and that scientist knows that the likelihood of getting to have a lab to work and play in may not ever happen again in their lives, that is a very real sacrifice. Any and all of those people are heroes in my book.

[mother earth]

64. Indeed they are, as are people like you, truedelphi. I hope to read more about your insights and

experiences, well done, keep writing and sharing.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

46. Jeff Smith's specialty is TM.

NOT fucking genetics. He has no background.

What the fuck is with the anti-science crowd in this thread? Really? Supporting a FUCKING TM GURU as the final word on GMOs?

[Dr Hobbitstein]

24. This is the bullshit Jeffery Smith promotes

Just as bad as the anti-vaxxers. Pseudo-science. Woo. Bullshit. And promoting RWNJ's like Mike Adams and Joseph Mercola.

http://www.responsibletechnology.org/autism
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/tag/natural-news/
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/new-interview-mike-adams-interviews-jeffrey-smith/
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/484/
http://action.responsibletechnology.org/o/6236/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1261856
http://www.responsibletechnology.org/posts/2010/11/

[mother earth]

27. Just because he has followers you don't approve of does not mean much, he's got slews of scientists,

physicians and medical professionals who agree with him on GMO's.

You can't taint the argument by tainting the man. Nice try, but no cigar. This issue is here to stay. YOU are the one who needs to be educated.

I want you to view Seeds of Deception or Genetic Roulette & tell me all is well. Hell, view the other video I posted here. All is not well in GMO's my friend. Whether or not Mercola or Mike Adams approves of Smith or not, I frankly don't care. I can tell the difference between someone offering up BS when I see it and you are guilty of it. This is not about anti-vaxxers, this is not about religion so why make it yours?

[Archae]

30. "Slews" of scientists?

Name them.

With their peer-reviewed evidence.

[mother earth]

32. Go watch Seeds of Deception & Genetic Roulette, & then cite studies done on GMO's other than

Monsanto. You schill, you are talking shit as always and you never back up any of it. You lucked out with Tyson, and are afraid of debate between these two men? LMFAO

I've posted scientists and their names here many times. I'm done with you woo peddling anti-science jokesters. You aren't about science, you are about BS & discrediting anyone who speaks against GMO's.

YOU name scientists that are offering up scientific data proving the safety of GMO's.

Hell, no one is buying the GMO bs, countries are boycotting it. We've got it here because of FDA influence, thanks to gov't and the revolving door.

How exactly are you a dem? I'm wondering what democratic principles allow you to wear the title of a dem? You like a controlled food supply, you love the GMO oligarchy. You aren't about science, either, though you like the glowing coat of pretention.

YOU offer peer-reviewed evidence, I've more than offered it here several times. Where's yours?

[Archae]

33. (Throws hands up in disgust)

Hopeless. Totally hopeless.

Say hello to Ken Ham and Mike Adams for me.

[mother earth]

36. You've GOT NOTHING! Always the game plays out the same, you've got to throw some other

names into the mix, to discredit and bolster a lame and essentially non-existent argument. You cannot cite any scientific studies that prove GMO's are safe. You can't because they don't allow scientific study, they do their best to prevent ALL scientific study, it proves their product is hazardous.

Gmo's and anyone here who defends them are going against science. They are actually supporting discrediting whistleblowers, they are supporting an oligarch with a revolving door to gov't law and criminal influence that only blood money can buy. It's not about one thing that is good.

You need a wake up call, you are going against science like zealots, religious zealots with nothing of substance to prove they are right.

Don't drop names like Mike Adams and Mercola, you are guilty of the worst kind of right wing nut jobbery and tomfoolery, right here at DU. How fucking ironic is that?

No democrat worth their salt takes on those stances voluntarily. I'm calling out this BS.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

38. WURGLE BLURGLE!!!

I prefer a balsamic vinaigrette on my word salad.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

40. Followers, hell...

His fucking colleagues. His financial fucking backers.

He's a quack with ZERO science background, and you're supporting HIM over a well respected astrophysicist. With the excuse that NDT is outside of his field. Smith's field is transcendental meditation.

[DhhD]

42. Using your logic, you are a bio-molecular chemist then? Describe YOUR GMO Study findings.

Provide us with where we can find your published studies and findings, the date issued.

Explain how poisonous compounds made by cell lines in other Kingdoms are not harmful to our cell membranes, cells and nucleic acids. I want to compare yourcell findings with the cell and virus findings that Mr. Smith's spoke about. I agree with Mr. Smith. I do not care where he grew up, what he ate for dinner, what he has a degree in, or who his friends are. I agree with his findings.

Please site the bio-molecular study and findings of the astrophysicist that you are replying about in #40. Since you brought it up on DU, I want to compare your findings with Mr. Smith.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

44. Mr. Smith is not a scientist...

He has no studies. He has no findings. He is not published and has not been peer reviewed.

He is a quack, supported by Mercola and Natural News. And you're still defending him. Confirmation bias is a helluva drug.

[Archae]

54. This guy uses the same tactics as Smith and his fan club...

Going with "gut feelings," ignoring contrary evidence, the works.

http://americanloons.blogspot.ca/2014/08/1139-daniel-shenton.html

[truedelphi]

59. Please see my remarks posted today in reply 58. n/t

[truedelphi]

60. Info released today lets the public know that

A distinguished professor at NYU has released some serious criticisms of the risk of GM seed, crops and foods:


http://ecowatch.com/2014/03/06/nyu-gmos-destroy-planet/

[Archae]

61. "Distinguished?"

Read this alarmist, hysterical comment from him:

Nassim Taleb, a renowned New York University (NYU) professor recently raised eyebrows when he said genetically modified organisms (GMOs) have the potential to cause “an irreversible termination of life at some scale, which could be the planet.”

GMO's are going to kill all the life on Earth?

Taleb is a statician.
He has *NO* qualifications in biology.

This is total bullshit.

[Esra Star]

65. I look forward to Neil's response.

Does one exist yet?