Search results for query: *

Don't pour Roundup on your chicken feed. Don't pour Roundup in their water Problem solved The entire report is "could", "might". "would likely", etc It's a definite MAYBE from a BLOG that supports organics

Quote: Name calling and denial don't help you make your case

Quote: No, I just disregard the rhetorical arguments that really don't have anything to do with the actual topic And ridiculous arguments like: Quote: Quote: I'm not getting emotional about any of this, but it sure sounds like you are Quote: And yet here you are

Quote: We don't There are multiple varieties of GMO corn, cotton, soybeans, etc. There are also germplasms developed for specific areas and weather conditions. http://www.monsanto.com/products/Pages/corn-seeds.aspx

I'm still waiting for some credible proof. Nothing you've shown so far has been anything more than false accusations and innuendo

Quote: Any fool with a video camera can post on Youtube It doesn't make them an authority on anything at all. Why not just admit you have no REAL evidence that GMO's are harmful?

There is no point, other than you keep posting misinformation as if it's fact. The only REAL point you've proven is that you'll repeat anything if you think it makes Monsanto look "evil"

Quote: Posting more FALSE information doesn't help your credibility. If the first portion was a lie, it all is

Quote: LOL Where's the big "surprise" in learning that if you FEED bees an INSECTICIDE for a month, they might die? A study that doesn't duplicate what is found in REAL LIFE is typical of the alarmist rhetoric used to excite people.

Quote: GMO farmers also use "no till" NON GMO farming requires more cultivation to control weeds. It's not rocket science Quote: What does that have to do with COMMERCIAL farming?

Quote: The links you posted weren't "studies" about actual harmful effects at all They were mainly articles TALKING about studies Most of the links you've posted were from the same group of scientists. The same scientists that you linked to did the FALSE studies I linked to. It's really not...

LOL You're still complaining about the SOURCE because you can't dispute the facts. GMO crops are NOT HARMFUL: http://ucfoodsafety.ucdavis.edu/files/26423.pdf http://toxsci.oxfordjournals.org/content/71/1/2.full http://www.who.int/foodsafety/publications/biotech/20questions/en/...

Quote: Quote: That's not going to happen If you can't scroll back and read what's already there, then you just want to argue instead of learning anything, and I'm not playing your silly little childish games. .

Quote: Quote: Go back and read what I've already posted

Quote: I've posted links that verify what I've said From your link: Quote: The SAME discredited "scientists" did all these reports,

Quote: Seralini did the flawed study about rat tumors. He has no credibility http://naturalsociety.com/sorry-monsanto-govt-admits-gm-bt-cotton-crops-fail-40-percent/ I already showed you the report that said the suicides had NO relation to GMO crops, and the crop FAILURES were due to...

Quote: LOL "The web is full of articles" If this thread is about"truth" why can't you show your "proof" instead of just giving opinions, and making false assumptions I can show mine: Quote: http://www.hangthebankers.com/eu-rejects-french-report-linking-gm-maize-to-cancer/

Quote: More misinformation, and nothing to back it up. Accusations seem to be all anyone has to offer Feel free to show these "studies"

LOL You can't disprove the fact, so you complain about the source? Look up the ACTUAL study Wiki referred to (it's in the footnotes) http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00808.pdf All the information you need to find the truth is right there