Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I find it amazing that you apparently think that ONLY those that disagree with you can be biased and surround themselves with 'scientists' that manufacture the answer they want.
You should find it amazing, since it's not what I said.
Anyone is capable of bias.
Actual science controls for this. It requires properly constructed hypotheses (falsifiable), carefully designed studies, and complete independence to follow the evidence wherever it leads. This last especially is what is generally lacking in corporate "science". That's why you have scientific foundations, government institutes, and the like, and why you have the independent peer review process.* Even then, it's not foolproof ... I have never claimed that it was.
However, when you get outside the bounds of corporate or religious bubbles, into the realm of worldwide reviewed scientific theories, none have been overturned to my knowledge in the past 300 or so years, since Newton codified the scientific method in basically its present form. Theories have been extended, refined, tweaked, but not shown to be wrong. The technology based on those proven theories demonstrably works.
This is different from scientific consensus about areas we don't have proven theories about. We don't know what causes cancer for sure, we just have a current preponderance of evidence. So yes, in 50 years, that consensus is apt to be turned on its ear ... by a proven scientific theory that will stand pretty much from then on.
You guys have a need to call the SM into question and that is YOUR bias. You do a lot of that by conflating word definitions (suggesting a theory in the scientific sense is someone's best guess, as in the colloquial sense for example), by conflating scientific theories with hypotheses or informed guesses, by equating one of science's greatest strengths (its ability to disprove things) as its greatest weakness, by conflating association with proof, etc.
* Guess how much of tobacco industry "science" was ever independently peer reviewed?
See out side with the sin of adultery God hold no spiritual authority , and even couples who are married need to refrain from lust , and this can still attract demons who can come and give curses
So somehow having sex while not married can attract demons and stuff while having identical sex while married cannot?
Are you speaking from experience or did you just make this up?
So somehow having sex while not married can attract demons and stuff while having identical sex while married cannot?
Are you speaking from experience or did you just make this up?
Einstein said we can think of the Earth as "at rest"
while everything else moves around it, because no experiment has ever
established that the Earth rotates.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7
Einstein said we can think of the Earth as "at rest"
while everything else moves around it, because no experiment has ever
established that the Earth rotates.
I would bet you're in favor of homeschooling, right?
Weird. I wonder if that stuff happens today....like...I don't know....maybe someone might have a vested interest in convincing the world that the earth is getting warmer because of SUV's?
Oh...I don't know....maybe Al Gore making hundreds of MILLIONS of dollars from it? Other organizations making huge profits off of selling carbon credits?
Yea, like all the scientists on board with Monsanto and Genetically Modified Foods. "Oh, we've done our scientific research and there is no harm to humans." And I wonder why all the intestinal problems and stomach problems are on the rise in the American public?
The local dairy farmer near where I live lost around half his milk cows due to feeding them GMO soybeans. They took Monsanto to court and won. Now if GMO foods do that to a huge cow, what do you think it does to little ole humans? Oh, but the scientific community says there is nothing to worry about. It is all safe.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Yea, like all the scientists on board with Monsanto and Genetically Modified Foods. "Oh, we've done our scientific research and there is no harm to humans." And I wonder why all the intestinal problems and stomach problems are on the rise in the American public?
Not a fan of Monsanto, however, this is an assertion you make, what can you cite that confirms this?
Quote:
The local dairy farmer near where I live lost around half his milk cows due to feeding them GMO soybeans. They took Monsanto to court and won. Now if GMO foods do that to a huge cow, what do you think it does to little ole humans? Oh, but the scientific community says there is nothing to worry about. It is all safe.
I did a search on this, and could find nothing online. Again, can you please reference this court case?
Oh, but the scientific community says there is nothing to worry about. It is all safe.
The scientific community is not "scientists employed by Monsanto" unless their research is 100% transparent, published to the general scientific world, and open to independent peer review. All of which I doubt to be the case.
In any case "GMO" is a pretty broad topic. My guess is that some is harmless, some is harmful, and some is questionable. I agree that it has been adopted too quickly and non-transparently. I support labeling GMO foods as a minimal first step in reigning this in. But in large measure the cat is already out of the bag and GMO organisms are interbreeding in the wild. It's not like there's a force field around GMO fields that keeps seeds from blowing into adjacent non-GMO fields.
THAT particular issue is a technological rather than scientific issue ... for all I know GMO feed for cows would be fine if it were properly commercialized and regulated.
I would also like to see the references to the court case you mentioned, I'm curious about the exact cause of the cows' demise.
Yea, like all the scientists on board with Monsanto and Genetically Modified Foods. "Oh, we've done our scientific research and there is no harm to humans." And I wonder why all the intestinal problems and stomach problems are on the rise in the American public?
The local dairy farmer near where I live lost around half his milk cows due to feeding them GMO soybeans. They took Monsanto to court and won. Now if GMO foods do that to a huge cow, what do you think it does to little ole humans? Oh, but the scientific community says there is nothing to worry about. It is all safe.
The scientific community does not support Monsanto and it's Agent Orange derivative called weed killer.
It is astonishing to see people spray this stuff to eliminate the tiny small green thing growing in a driveway crack. Get the green thing, and don't worry about the stuff leaching into the soil to kill small bugs, and worms. Monsanto science is in the business of killing things. Their genetically modified corn has many names, and many forms.
None the less, science is pretty awesome. Like the science that discovered the cure for polio. The science that allows couples to plan their families. How about the science of baking? Pretty awesome stuff.
Now all we have to do is convince people to eat organic like the ancients in the Bible.
The scientific community is not "scientists employed by Monsanto" unless their research is 100% transparent, published to the general scientific world, and open to independent peer review. All of which I doubt to be the case.
In any case "GMO" is a pretty broad topic. My guess is that some is harmless, some is harmful, and some is questionable. I agree that it has been adopted too quickly and non-transparently. I support labeling GMO foods as a minimal first step in reigning this in. But in large measure the cat is already out of the bag and GMO organisms are interbreeding in the wild. It's not like there's a force field around GMO fields that keeps seeds from blowing into adjacent non-GMO fields.
THAT particular issue is a technological rather than scientific issue ... for all I know GMO feed for cows would be fine if it were properly commercialized and regulated.
I would also like to see the references to the court case you mentioned, I'm curious about the exact cause of the cows' demise.
There is a gag order as part of their settlement. However that didn't stop the owner of the farm telling me everything that happened. I live a couple of miles from their farm. I go there every weekend to get their organic milk and other organic things. They are truly wonderful people. What is interesting is that very few people ever win against Monsanto.
There has been plenty of information in leading magazines and other science related magazines touting Monsanto's GMO garbage.
The scientific community does indeed back Monsanto and GMO's. Just GOOGLE "scientific community backs Monsanto's GMO". However, let it be known that Monsanto has a very bad name around the globe as the most evil company on earth. I hope Monsanto doesn't go after me for stating this. Not that I am paranoid. There is an old saying "Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you."
What is interesting is that the European community wanted nothing of the GMO crops. What came to light via Edward Snowden is it was found out through WikiLeaks that our government was going to make Europe pay (in a bad way) for not adopting GMO's.
If they are so good, and good for you, why do we need to threaten other countries to get on board with GMO's? It is *possible* this (GMO's) is just another of the multi-pronged approach to de-population. But that is just my thought and I could be wrong about that.
Oh, and since this thread is about sex, they are finding out that rats fed GMO's, that around the third generation they are sterile. Nice population control, eh? Read it here: http://naturalsociety.com/new-study-...ats-infertile/
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
