Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Technology at its best!
1 view
Skip to first unread message
thang ornerythinchus
Mar 9, 2012, 5:36:25 AM3/9/12
to
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-09/aussie-scientists-provide-india-with-iron-rich-bananas/3880672
So again, technology saves millions and improves the lives of millions
more.
barryg
Mar 17, 2012, 5:41:33 PM3/17/12
to
thang hopes...
> http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-03-09/aussie-scientists-provide-india-with-iron-rich-bananas/3880672
>
> So again, technology saves millions and improves the lives of millions
> more.
http://www.naturalnews.com/035161_Bt_toxin_GM_crops_species.html
now quickly say which one is true! :)
thang ornerythinchus
Mar 18, 2012, 6:30:45 PM3/18/12
to
I hope you are not denying the benefits to sick people, millions of
them, from ingesting GM bananas with enhanced iron content? I don't
think you are, but if you were, that would make you not worth talking
to.
Regarding "which one is true", that's a bit of a silly statement isn't
it? I mean, both are true, except you need to read the underlying
study in the second case. It's here:
http://www.enveurope.com/content/24/1/9
The study concluded:
"Scientists concerned with the environmental risks of novel
technologies ought not to dismiss new knowledge/phenomena and
delegitimize unexpected results based on their being 'surprising' and
lacking an explanatory mechanism at the time of discovery, or possibly
triggering policy responses one happens to disagree with. Scientific
progress often comes about by first discovering and reporting an
unexpected and inexplicable novel phenomenon. Only if that phenomenon
is deemed of sufficient curiosity and importance do we embark on
exploring the underlying mechanisms. More often than not, this
requires entirely different expertise and techniques than those of the
discoverers. It is indisputable that the lack of an explanatory
mechanism does not - or rather, should not - invalidate an empirically
established phenomenon. "
Yet your source:
http://www.naturalnews.com/035161_Bt_toxin_GM_crops_species.html
stated:
"It also exposes the illegitimacy of the various industry-funded
studies that claim Bt toxin is safe for non-target species, including
humans, an unfounded claim that has been proven false time and time
again."
**Including humans**??
The study reported in Environmental Europe says NOTHING about toxic
effects on humans. It is a good paper and a good study, and its
conclusion is basically that unbiased studies are needed to further
technological progress. But it did not conclude, or even mention,
toxic effects on humans, or even criticise Monsanto.
It only concluded that green lacewings and lady bug larvae were,
statistically, open to higher mortalities when eggs were painted with
the toxin than otherwise.
I wouldn't be comparing this "statistical" result with the very real
benefits of enhanced iron content in bananas for those hundreds of
millions of undernourshed people throughout the world, would you?
Slider, read your citations next time before you argue with me please.
It makes you a goose if you don't. You have plenty of time don't you?
Also, if the BarryG moniker was in fact you hitting the wrong persona
for this group, then harken back to when I told you I detected signs,
apparent to me at least, that you are clinically depressed (one of
which is you always take the glass half empty, morose, negative,
"waiting for armageddon" position on everything). Your BarryG
persona's email address:
From: "barryg" <do...@well-depressed.co.uk>
would seem to clarify, if not confirm, my view.
thang
>
karmabum
Mar 21, 2012, 8:44:42 AM3/21/12
to
and to date have never posted anything anywhere else before under that name,
ditto karmabum (tho i have posted under that name) none of which is a case of
me hiding as i've always used the hash signs (###) to reveal who it really is
posting... plus why should i do that? well, in this instance anyway it's to do
with letting you know/realise that i'm not quite as nailed down as you are,
even though you'd like nothing better than to pin me down to something, it
can't really be done :)
the point of 'which one is true' etc, being that there are still many
conflicting reports as to the safety of GM plants and foods, the one i
remember most being the early case of some GM crop (or plants) that killed the
butterflies feeding on them, that while the makers of such products tend to
talk up the market for their products mentioning only their 'benefits' in
order to promote them etc, nevertheless are their many complaints from their
purchasers re some of the negative side effects on the local fauna and flora,
things that then raise the question as to how safe or not these things really
are for humans that we haven't either been told about and/or have yet to
emerge...
that while suckers immediately lap all this new scientific stuff up like it's
nectar, yourself for example singing the praises of modified bananas, the real
truth behind that is probably still at the experimental stage, with the whole
of india apparently now being the guinea pigs they're testing it on, my
question being is it really so true that these genetically modified bananas
are doing us humans a lot of good as you state, or not... there being enough +
identified negative results to date for such tinkering to at least put (and
keep) a question mark over the whole subject until such times as it's all been
proven totally safe for consumption...
e.g. some of the very early genetic experiments were absolutely known to be
deadly and were 'supposed' to be never released, only the way they went about
it in many cases allowed plenty of it (enough anyway) to escape into the wild
with totally unknown + completely unforeseen consequences! and so now they're
singing the praises of genetically modified bananas like it's the new saviour
or something, only no one really knows for certain yet just how good or
harmful it really is...
iow, if you believe in it then 'you' eat it, not give it to india where
everyone there's too poor to be ever able to sue if/when it starts producing
horrible/fatal birth defects! that before you start singing the praises of
something then it's probably best to do research concerning any potentially
harmful effects as well as any known good ones that advertisers always use to
promote their shit :)
thang ornerythinchus
Mar 22, 2012, 6:36:10 AM3/22/12
to
It doesn't matter. I have done exactly the same thing - fucked up by
posting under the wrong (nay, malpropos) persona. Don't give it
another thought because I won't.
It's just the internet at the end of the day and I actually don't mind
jousting with you from time to time. Tends to hone my mind somewhat,
hey what??
>
>the point of 'which one is true' etc, being that there are still many
>conflicting reports as to the safety of GM plants and foods, the one i
>remember most being the early case of some GM crop (or plants) that killed the
>butterflies feeding on them, that while the makers of such products tend to
>talk up the market for their products mentioning only their 'benefits' in
>order to promote them etc, nevertheless are their many complaints from their
>purchasers re some of the negative side effects on the local fauna and flora,
>things that then raise the question as to how safe or not these things really
>are for humans that we haven't either been told about and/or have yet to
>emerge...
monster and could easily spin out of control. Perhaps it has in past
civilisations, who knows. But in the case I mentioned you simply
cannot ignore the benevolent effect on the health of millions upon
millions of people just like you and I.
>
>that while suckers immediately lap all this new scientific stuff up like it's
>nectar, yourself for example singing the praises of modified bananas, the real
>truth behind that is probably still at the experimental stage, with the whole
>of india apparently now being the guinea pigs they're testing it on, my
>question being is it really so true that these genetically modified bananas
>are doing us humans a lot of good as you state, or not... there being enough +
>identified negative results to date for such tinkering to at least put (and
>keep) a question mark over the whole subject until such times as it's all been
>proven totally safe for consumption...
on this orb who questions everything. I mean, everything. Don't be
so cynical all of the time - it's permissible some of the time, but
not as a lifestyle, which appears to be the case in your
circumstances. Cut yourself some slack.
>
>e.g. some of the very early genetic experiments were absolutely known to be
>deadly and were 'supposed' to be never released, only the way they went about
>it in many cases allowed plenty of it (enough anyway) to escape into the wild
>with totally unknown + completely unforeseen consequences! and so now they're
>singing the praises of genetically modified bananas like it's the new saviour
>or something, only no one really knows for certain yet just how good or
>harmful it really is...
>
>iow, if you believe in it then 'you' eat it, not give it to india where
>everyone there's too poor to be ever able to sue if/when it starts producing
>horrible/fatal birth defects! that before you start singing the praises of
>something then it's probably best to do research concerning any potentially
>harmful effects as well as any known good ones that advertisers always use to
>promote their shit :)
are, believe it or not, fortunate enought not to need additional
minerals and vitamins in our diets.
India is still a third world country.
thang
>
>
>
>
karmabum
Mar 22, 2012, 8:10:04 AM3/22/12
to
thang still hopes...
i've been making all along, iow don't trust everything you read and/or
hear :)
>
>>
>>that while suckers immediately lap all this new scientific stuff up like
>>it's
>>nectar, yourself for example singing the praises of modified bananas, the
>>real
>>truth behind that is probably still at the experimental stage, with the
>>whole
>>of india apparently now being the guinea pigs they're testing it on, my
>>question being is it really so true that these genetically modified bananas
>>are doing us humans a lot of good as you state, or not... there being enough
>>+
>>identified negative results to date for such tinkering to at least put (and
>>keep) a question mark over the whole subject until such times as it's all
>>been
>>proven totally safe for consumption...
>
> I'm no sucker Slider you should acknowledge that. I am one of the few
> on this orb who questions everything. I mean, everything. Don't be
> so cynical all of the time - it's permissible some of the time, but
> not as a lifestyle, which appears to be the case in your
> circumstances. Cut yourself some slack.
speak in extremes sometimes for the sake of clarity is all... plus don't say
'everything' coz you tripped/fucked up you know that time on the subject of
nicotine? i mean, no one could have been more adamant than you, nor more
offensive in defending your belief and resulting abject denial, and although i
know only too well how much you'd just love to forget all about it, i happen
to think it's actually rather important and shouldn't be overlooked, but
examined by yourself to the smallest detail as there's a message (from the
real world) to you contained therein + i'm not joking around about this, it's
important! (i.e. it's important that you realise at a profound level just how
exactly you could have been so easily taken-in/fooled by such blatant black
propaganda and the twisting of the truth to suit a different agenda)
>
>
>>
>>e.g. some of the very early genetic experiments were absolutely known to be
>>deadly and were 'supposed' to be never released, only the way they went
>>about
>>it in many cases allowed plenty of it (enough anyway) to escape into the
>>wild
>>with totally unknown + completely unforeseen consequences! and so now
>>they're
>>singing the praises of genetically modified bananas like it's the new
>>saviour
>>or something, only no one really knows for certain yet just how good or
>>harmful it really is...
>
> Name one...one that was deadly and was never to be released.
butterflies all died + their mentioning their never intending to release
untested items until proven safe, only the conditions they did their
experiments in were actually ridiculously unprotected from contaminating the
rest of the environment as they weren't even contained more than so, who
knows what damage has been done to potentially the gene pools of so many
species in the process, species that animals co-evolved along-side with over
millions of years of adaptation, and then virtually overnight it's all been
altered with absolutely no apparent concern for what it could potentially do,
key pollinators being killed off along-side the very pests they were seeking
to kill being an incredibly dangerous thing to have even risked, plus maybe
there's even an explanation or 3 in there that accounts for what's been
happening to all the bees?
>
>>
>>iow, if you believe in it then 'you' eat it, not give it to india where
>>everyone there's too poor to be ever able to sue if/when it starts producing
>>horrible/fatal birth defects! that before you start singing the praises of
>>something then it's probably best to do research concerning any potentially
>>harmful effects as well as any known good ones that advertisers always use
>>to
>>promote their shit :)
>
> Because here in the west we don't need the enhancements because we
> are, believe it or not, fortunate enought not to need additional
> minerals and vitamins in our diets.
>
> India is still a third world country.
meanwhile 'monsanto' is gradually being mobbed by complaints about their
business practices destroying peoples independence and making slaves of
them to, yes you guessed it, monsanto products! (i.e. google monsanto to see
for yourself all the complaints about what it's doing to communities in india
and other, 3rd world countries, not to mention the usa!)
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_18841.cfm
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Drug_War/Monsanto_DrugWar.html
as a tiny sample!!!
ffs wake up! :)
karmabum
Mar 22, 2012, 8:19:03 AM3/22/12
to
Jeremy H. Donovan
Apr 17, 2012, 6:42:33 PM4/17/12
to
Here's a very important technological development:
https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2012/Mar/NR-12-03-02.html
https://www.llnl.gov/news/newsreleases/2012/Mar/NR-12-03-02.html
thang ornerythinchus
Apr 17, 2012, 6:53:35 PM4/17/12
to
election. Those bible bashing fear mongering ignorant conservatives
will shut this type of innovation down asap.
Hail the fusion future.
thang
0 new messages