If Trump became like Bill tomorrow, what would his first twit be?

Feb 9, 2017 4:57 PM

mibakr

Views

516543

Likes

16433

Dislikes

692

You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. When the facts change, the smart change with them.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Yes, be like Bill and take the money.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 7

Almost every food is a GMO. Almost every Citrus is a GMO. Broccoli, Bananas, Figs, Cauliflower, Almonds, all 100% GMO.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

If Trump became like Bill, his first tweet would probably be something about jailing everyone who doesn't agree with him.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Bill... The same Bill that said people who doubt some aspects of the global warming myth should be imprisoned? That Bill? Hes a douche.

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 10

for anyone curious about actual science: http://climate.nasa.gov/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Also, surprising no-one, that's a complete misrepresentation of what he actually said: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlk4Lt__Sn0

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

"The best thing about science is that it's true regardless if you believe it or not."

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 10

The worst thing about science is that we don't know if we are wrong and will get mocked in 100 years for believing the science we have today

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

This. +1

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

So he publicly voiced his opinion on the matter BEFORE looking into it? Be slightly like Bill.

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 3

I think this every time i see this post...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fair enough. I'll upvote you back up to one point.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

I love science as much as anyone, but screw him and his ego. Unpopular .jpg

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 5

I'm against GMOs, said no starving person ever

9 years ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 11

But the GMO crops haven't changed anything https://nyti.ms/2dR9DRr

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But those statistics are heavily confounded by differences *other* than the simple "GMO allowed or not"! Better machinery = Better yield.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

What if GMOs caused their starvation?

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

Then you get The Windup Girl

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then you get The Windup Girl.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

(because some big company (you know wich one I mean) gave them away for free once and now nothing else grows on that field anymore.)

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

Then you get The Windup Girl.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

They didn't. In fact the only reason we have the amount of food produced each year presently is due to genetic modification.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Bullshit. You're confusing genetic engineering with cultivation.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Additional People haven't died of starvation since then. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

No, I'm referring to the fact that direct genetic modification during the green revolution in the late 60's is the only reason 3-4 billion 1

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

GMO isn't the issue, it's the massive use of RoundUp running off fields and killing vegetation in waterways/wetlands, making super weeds.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 6

All 22 oz of it per football field *sigh* Check your sources, farmers laugh at this

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

As a person literally living in a rural community.. Please don't attack glyphosphate too much, it's literally the safest we have.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

you know what the alternative is? Massive use of "natural/organic pesticides", yes organic farms use them, and they are probably worse.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

Thank you!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Glphosate is poison and it does not wash off.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 6

Glphosate is super-dooper extremely toxic. Glyphosate on the other hand is fairly innocuous

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

I used to like Nye. Then I realized he was kind of a douche.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 7

What a joke. He's not a scientist. He's a mere engineer. What a fraud. Bill, go play scientist somewhere else. Europe would luv you!

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 9

Yet he is beloved. Hard to deny his general contributions to science, is it?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Hitler was beloved, hard to deny his contributions to rocketry.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

What an insane comparison. Bill Nye has created dozens of 'wacky' scientific oriented videos intended to inspire the youth to pursue science

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

If you want to find the truth, just follow the path of the money. Nothing is as science as this.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 4

pretty sure I could buy this guy an opinion for less than ten grand

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Brought to you by Monsanto.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 6

Monsanto was bought by Bayer. So let's thank Bayer or as I always like to use Dow. Screw Dow.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

First twit: "I have been mistaken about a great many things"

9 years ago | Likes 127 Dislikes 8

That's kind of a Thorin thing to say.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

"Guys, I fucked up."

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

2nd: i have kicked bannon, preibus, and miller to the curb and fired conway.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You forgot the 'Sad'

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 2

I have been mistaken by many things. especially things that go against me. SAD!

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

'I will study this dumb "science"'

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

calm down there Palpatine

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

That would be one long, long list

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

Goddamnit! It's not GMOs themselves it's the ONE goddamn company pushing them & the opposition to labeling the things we ingest.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 8

There are multiple GMO companies, and most of the criticisms are made up or apply to all seeds, even organics.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You know there's loads of companies who make GMOs right? I'm all for regulation, but if Monsanto is a monopoly so is coca cola.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

True. "Monsanto is bad - down with GMOs" is like saying "There are corrupt pharmaceutical companies - down with medicine"

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Labels exist to inform us about relevant things. GMO status is not relevant. QED they should not be labeled.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

Anything being ingested is relevant esp if it's man-made.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

May as well just label them as contains DNA and proteins, like all food, your body doesn't care where DNA and proteins come from.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

The fact companies fight legislation that makes them tell you what's inside food scares me.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

required for life. And people don't complain about getting sick after eating tomatoes which are super high in MSG. Did you ever (3)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

wonder why it says no *added* MSG? They fear unfounded reactionism hurting their products, they don't fear rational informed people. (4)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

glutamate. People latched onto MSG because it sounded scary, but you know what? MS is basically half of salt and G is an amino acid (2)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

It's the MSG problem. The guy who came up with "Chinese restaurant syndrome" gave 3 possibilities, alcohol, salt, and monosodium (1)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Bill needs to come back to Maryland and face justice for what he did

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Please elaborate, I've not heard about this.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm glad you asked! People need to know what he's done. On 29 November 2004, William Sanford Nye of Santa Monica, CA was charged with >>

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

>> failure to obey a properly-placed traffic control device on Conway St. in Baltimore. He neither paid his $75 fine nor appeared in court.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If you want to find the truth, just follow the path of the money. Nothing is as science as this.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 5

People get grants to show companies what they need to show for profit... Science is a capitalist Bitch for the last 50 years

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

I followed the money. I found that most published criticism of GMO is by organic lobbyists and Greenpeace.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 23, 2019 1:30 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Even Wikipedia would reject that as a source. But that's ok, I respect rightwing eco-creationists.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is Bill. Bill thinks climate change doubters should be in prison. Dont be a communist like Bill, and respect the right to have opinions

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 15

This is SlicedSides. SlicedSides thinks we don't know that Nye actually supports corporations who knowingly committed fraud being charged 1/

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

With committing fraud for lying about the reality and dangers of climate change, just like tobacco execs did in the past. Don't be an 2/

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Idiot like SlicedSides and lie about public figures because you don't personally like them 3/3

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 5

Do your research before you insult someone. http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/14/bill-nye-open-criminal-charges-jail-time-climate-c

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Take your own advice, he says it right in the video, that he supports jail time for executives who willfully lied about AGW and its 1/

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Danger just like the execs of tobacco companies. He uses that exact comparison. You've only dug yourself deeper kid 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Says the one with all the downvotes lmao. Keep down voting me I can take it. You're the one digging yourself a deeper hole.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Im not in a hole, and your just wrong. Advocating executives who commit fraud being charged with fraud isn't a crazy stance.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

So what you're saying is, Don't look for science or evidence, just trust that guy from TV.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Or.... Listen to that guy from TV while he explains the science and evidence and then follow the evidence he has shown

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

You win a cookie. Don't ask what's in it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Wait really? As far as I know he's only ever "admitted he was wrong" about one thing, and that was after he was confronted about it.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

He may be a great celebrity science educator, but as a man he appears to be as egotistical and arrogant as a stereotypical celebrity.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I mean thats cool, can you provide links to the articles/references?

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

THANK YOU! I went down 20+ comments to give you upvote numbah 5. This guy's got the right followup to such a statement! Keep being you!!!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

"After reviewing the overwhelming evidence supporting immigration being good for the economy, I am making Nordstrom pay for the wall."

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 11

0 economic reports say immigration in SWE costs less than 60 billion/year (crime, etc. isn't even included). Swedes are literally starving.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 5

75000 Swedish seniors are starving to death. Over 230000 are living under the poverty line. Marxist gov sold out the people for power.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

What the fuck are you talking about?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Google "75000 pensionärer", etc. The sources are very accessible. This isn't obscure data. It's been reported by the Swedish state TV & MSM.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Better build a wall Sweden and Denmark.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Our surrounding nations see our nation as a quarantine zone used as an example of where virtue signaling and multiculturalism will get you.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

I'm sure a lot of white supremacists are eager to blame that instead of your woefully inadequate economy.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

To be less snarky, Sweden also accepted a flood of refugees they weren't economically prepared for, the U.S. doesn't face that issue.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 8

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 10, 2017 4:23 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Oh hey, you seem to be a stupid asshole completely ignorant as to what you're talking about. Get ready to go to school.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 9

I think I love you

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

5) (final) SS and Medicare are the biggest contibutors to our debt and immigrants only improve the budget for both.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

4) The rate at which our debt has grown has shrunk tremendously as deficits shrank all throughout the past 8 years.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

3) Immigrants pay about $13B a year into social security and only take $1B out.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 6

1) Immigrants pay billions more into Medicare than they take out. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-015-3418-z

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

2) Immigrants pay up to $11.6B in taxes every year.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 6

Not an argument. That could just as easily (if not more) be a response to your comment.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Very few people think GMO foods pose a *medical* risk. It's that they pose a *corporate takeover of the food supply* risk. GMO = DRM of food

9 years ago | Likes 70 Dislikes 20

They are also closely related to government subsidies, factory farming and shitty monocropping techniques. Bad for diet and the environment.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How? Long before GMO's, farmers bought seeds from comps. Do I hear a monopoly? Yes. But companies had the seeds way before GMOs, for reason

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Most anti-GMO people believe they pose a medical risk....

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You know conventional seeds have pretty much the same business practise, few people use wild seeds, very low yield.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Conventional seeds are not copyrighted. Non-hybrid seeds, which are just fine, yieldwise, can even be "reused".

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

1) Patent, not copyright 2) Non-GMO seeds can be patented too,although the similar Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA) is more commonly used

7 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Monsanto will sue a farmer who reseeds from plants from their seeds, even if your neigbor had monsanto, and their crops pollinated yours.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Farmers have no interest in 're-using' seeds, actually. Source: Farmer family, farming community

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

But the choice should be preverved, right? Otherwise monopoly or worse.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Of course. But I don't blame Monsanto at all for making sure farmers can't just re-use their investment right after.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

You must have met very few people.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i have a friend with a BS in microbiology who thinks GMOs pose a medical risk. not that she's representative of any but herself, of course.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

Interesting. I can tell you in my graduating class of chemists biochemists no one believed GMOs are a risk to anything but biodiversity.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's not that difficult to get a BS in anything. She's wrong.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

it's not a question of the difficulty. it's that she learned all this information and is still on the side against GMOs.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As a toxicologist, the medical concern is the pesticides they use. That's it. The food itself is fine.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

And yet, surprisingly, few countries ban those pesticides, or the "natural" pesticides organic crops can use.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah. I'm also baffled at how many people think organic means no pesticides.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Worse pesticides mostly, at least synthetic pesticides are custom built, natural ones tend to kill everything and persist longer.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That and dumping pesticides on our crops like they do with GMOs is bound to have some nasty unintended consequences

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Scrolled down to find this. Glad someone said it.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Grow regular seeds, problem?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I am all for GMO, but I think I've heard that there actually is a problem. Not sure if that was a conspiracy theory, though.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Something about expensive mandatory licensing, which was passed to hinder monsanto but does the opposite or something like that.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Farmer next field over has GMO crops. Pollen drifts into your field. Your next year's seed now has their DNA. Monsanto sues you. It happens.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 12

Except that has never happened. You're perpetuating a myth started by the anti-gmo movement.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

They have been in a LOT of lawsuits over this. The fact that something self-replicating can be patented is the issue since over time 1

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 8

more and more crops will naturally contain the patented DNA, whether it's desired or not. They have only a non-binding statement 2

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 7

For a farmer? Yea.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Lower yield thus less money for already poor farmers. But corporate seeds have to be licensed. Either way kinda sucks.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Cruel world.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Higher food prices would help the farmers but then everyone would complain about the higher prices.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

What if I don't want to eat GMO food because Monsanto are assholes and turned growing food into a licensing system. Bring back labels!

9 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 8

That's not what labeling's for.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 4

I know the intent of labeling. I found a better use for it than the intended purpose. Sort of like how Viagra started as a heart med.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Monsanto didn't start seed patents. They're pretty much standard across all commercial agriculture.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Monsanto isn't alone, just the biggest. Whether they started it or not is irrelevant.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yeah... maybe after the merger. They're not the biggest, just the most vilified.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My point was that patents are not exclusive to gmo's. Even organic seeds can be patented.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just one example. My wife's dad, granddad, and great granddad did not need to pay a company for the right to grow food.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

They still don't. They're entirely free to grow any non patented seed varieties.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

I should also be free to not support patented seed varieties, no matter if I don't trust them (not the case) or don't support them.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Even organic farmers buy patented seeds.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Everything else I buy is labeled. I don't purchase a smartphone unsure if it's iOS or Android. FDA even has rules for what is 'ice cream' vs

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

GMO corps are having a problem with their pesticides... crops are now resistant AND new insects have been evolutionarily developed

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

I think you mean weeds being resistant, but GMOs also make proper pesticide use that helps to prevent resistance easier.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Was going to say.. You WANT your crops resistant.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Ya exactly... except companies like Monsanto are having a hard time with their crops bc of this... it's not dangerous just interesting

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Doesn't even have to be science. I changed my opinion on gay marriage after reading into it. Can't believe I used to think it was ok...

9 years ago | Likes 946 Dislikes 83

"reading" (wink*)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

M Night Shyamalan is that you?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's the funniest thing I've read all week, and I've read a lot of imgur. Not much makes me laugh out loud.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You uhh.. y'got some fundie "blood upvote" on you, bud.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Plumbing is off

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Lol "what a twist"

9 years ago | Likes 274 Dislikes 1

Har har har le funy joek

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

D

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think your primary issue was that you were married to a man when you were a heterosexual.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 0

@SethReborn tried to make this rendition so people really know that you were joking.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hey, were you joking...lol

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not sure if joking...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I always wondered do they take turn penetrating eachother or one of them is permanently being the 'hole' or smthing??

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

hehe. first giggle of today.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Scary thing is that he is not joking...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I was joking. Not sure how, but somewhere in the replies it was implied that I wasn't. But once again, I support gay marriage.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'll be frank; I saw your "well, I have lots of historical reasons.." and just assumed you were an idiot. My bad, carry on.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

665 points... +1 for shits and giggle

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sensible chuckle here.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I think people are up voting this because they think it's sarcasm.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

They would be right

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I think people are up voting this because they think it's sarcasm.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

It is

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Are you sure? The follow up comments seem to say it isn't? Unless his sarcasm game is super strong.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

I also told him how to use "/s/" or "/sarcasm/" to indicate his sarcasm in the future.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Unfuckingbelievable! What the fuck is wrong with you??

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 14

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Oh. Thank you. Now I'm confused. Lol

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

I need to know!! So many ppl got the wrong idea, and I'm at a loss. What made you think it was serious?

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Sheesh, yeah, you had a comment after your post that implied that you actually felt that way. Had me worried.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Lol, now I feel bad, I thought you were being an arsehole, hahaha. I'd say just TOO dry, too sarcastic. And that's coming from a ..../1

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Me: He's gotta be joking, right? Me: *reads his other posts* Me: oh guess not

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 9

He just responded saying it was a joke btw

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

What, his post, or his entire acct? Cause...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Thanks man, I don't know how I screwed up. Thanks for clarifying others

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I was against gmo's until I realized I was just against Monsanto

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

TBF, Monsanto is evil.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Me too. I still have a concern for biodiversity though. But, ya, we need to feed a lot of people.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

And GMO is not the answer! https://nyti.ms/2dR9DRr

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

While I think you're probably kidding I would be curious what a person would read that would change thier mind that way.

9 years ago | Likes 97 Dislikes 10

THEY PUT IT IN EACHOTHERS POOPER!!!

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

Dey eat da poopoo!

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

The divorce lawyer's bill

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

I actually saw a video of a guy who said he used to be for gay marriage until the Westboro Baptist Church "opened his eyes."

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

That's a bonafide YIKES

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah, his brown eye maybe.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 10, 2017 6:24 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 10, 2017 6:24 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Feb 10, 2017 1:00 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

wut?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sniff, sniff: a book about smell (human relationships: homosexual honeymoon edition)

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

You made me LOL. I don't think people are getting how funny this was

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Yeah I'm a bit disappointed

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

no wasn't the bible. as i objected on several points, and read many things, it's hard to give even a general answer to that question in 180

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 20

I know, it's terrible when two consenting adults want to marry, just awful.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 4

Whoa, apt username...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

you can't even name a few key sources?

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

I never recorded the sources (7yrs ago). But I guess you could say they were all historic, the origins of the word, the church, society.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 17

I suggest you read in to it again, try talking to gay people who have gotten married, and stories of gay couples from before they could.

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

I suggest you read in to it again, try talking to gay people who have gotten married, and stories of gay couples from before they could.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 4

Who gives a Fuck what the church says? Marriage is also a legal binding contact that grants certain rights. Separation of church and state.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

I'm no longer sure you were joking.

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 3

i was joking. i did change my mind though. but to clarify i support gay marriage. not sure where i went wrong with the joke bit?

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

v

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sometimes tricky to be sure through text. First comment was obviously joking, second seemed almost dry enough to be serious.

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

Basically you didn't, but Poe's law.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Just not very good at them.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

When I do sarcasm I say "/s/" at the end or "/sarcasm/"

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

no it was a joke.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Not gonna lie; was very concerned for a moment

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Thank god

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

I was 100% sure he was kidding. I was wrong. 8-(

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

No you were, right. He just commented. He was just continuing the joke.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Hmm. Ta.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

The name makes it sound happy but the truth is it's just as bad as straight marriage.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hard to say, I guess the only thing I can think of is if you look from an evolutionary standpoint? Can't produce vital offspring if you 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

er, from an evolutionary standpoint there have literally always been LGBTQ people and yet we are still an overpopulated planet, so... newp.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

even then though, fostering/adoption definitely has a role in the success/survival of a species

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Can't reproduce? (Not my actual view).

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can see why some people would use that as an argument, but it ignores so many things it's not even funny. More holes than a collender

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I can see why some people would use that as an argument, but it ignores so many things it's not even funny. More holes than a collender

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Gay ppl ain't gonna suddenly reproduce just cos they can't get married. "Oh noes, I can't marry the same-sex love of my life! Guess .... /1

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I'm just gonna have to break up with them and have sex with a person I'm not attracted to at all, and have a kid." Amirite?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Evolutionary standpoint is irrelevant within a species that adapt its environment for survival

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Besides, it's mostly been proven that the gay male gene increases fertility in women, producing a net increase in children passing the gene.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Wtf are you on about!? Got any sources for this claim? Would like to read this research

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(Not that there's a single gene that causes homosexuality, or that it's been identified, but we can still deduce properties of it)

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Lots of people are 'born again Christians'. I imagine it's happened.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"I thought it was just a marriage between two people that were really happy"

9 years ago | Likes 73 Dislikes 0

"And then I learned that gays can be just as miserable in their marriages as straight folk. Who knew?!"

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

The Bible, probly. (He said in a joking manner, not wanting imgur to bludgeon him)

9 years ago | Likes 72 Dislikes 6

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

AND THEN THEY OLE FACKED

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

v bludgeon like this?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

damn those elephant babies are sturdy

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

WHY WOULD YOU SHOW ME THAT?!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"AGAIN! AGAIN!"

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Huh. to be fair, are you against marriages in general? Or just a homophobe @sethreborn

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 11

neither, the last bit was a joke. unless you're referring to before i changed my mind? the answer would still be neither

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The fact that he had to specify GAY marriage leads me to believe he's a homophobe

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 19

The fact that the comment was structured like a joke leads me to believe it was a joke.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

You are correct. Although somehow, I've managed to mess it up in the replies. Ah well

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

neither, the last bit was a joke. unless you're referring to before i changed my mind? the answer would still be neither

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

You mean he was paid to shut up. A few mill and some fame can make men do anything.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Just because you would compromise you ethics for money doesn't mean that someone else would.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Monsanto. Follow the crumbs.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Exactly. A mouthpiece for those with an agenda. BS

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

You're going to haveto pay a lot more more millions, the scientific consensus on GMO safety is higher than global warming

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

That's my concern too. Exxon mobile tried to control science on global warming, yet what's the concencus on that right now?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

That's not saying as much as you think it is.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Unless you've read all the papers on it from the majority of researchers then you can't claim that

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

You're free to review a large number of sites.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Unless you've read all the papers on it from the majority of researchers then you can't claim that

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

I can and i did, Its called a census. You don't need to know every individual in the country to know its population

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 5

Unless you read the papers they wrote and not what someone else tells you they say then your claim doesn't work

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

Its called a census. You don't need to know every individual in the country to know its population

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

So do you think there's a conspiracy and the scientists are saying something different?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

The problem is that people view GMOs as a monolith, it's like saying "are knives good or bad" of course someone could make an unhealthful (1

9 years ago | Likes 777 Dislikes 21

ALL knives are good. What they are used for is what alters perspective.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Just like how ALL dogs are good, Brett. Wait what? talking to myself? lonely...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

GMOs are about controlling food not feeding the people

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

"Of course knives are good. Why would you ask whether knives are good or bad?" -- guy sneaking up behind me with a knife

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Stop fucking with my fucking food. That's all.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Or ya know...grow your own

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Whatz fucking food? ... you mean like mayo?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Exactly what I was going to say

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah, be like Bill. check that stuff before you advocate using it or selling it to someone.

9 years ago | Likes 0 Dislikes 2

.... so evidence and proof are important, unless they might not support your opinion, got it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

To which some countries respond "bad" by banning knives which I guess just supports your point because of how stupid it is

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem comes when people conflate poor business practices with the very act of genetically modifying foods.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

But another problem is that they are hard to separate. A lot of GMO comes with abusive business practices -- and untrustworthy businesses.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

But you still can't just declare GMO's to be bad. Proper oversight and regulatory authority are the answer, not kneejerk reaction.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Guns

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And just cause GM food is safe doesn't mean Monsanto isn't evil. They were saying it was safe BEFORE the science was in. They're bastards.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Same way how Trump nowadays says that media is untrustworthy. Media is = thousands of different seperate voices.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

OMG I love your username!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The hell is unhealthful?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 6

I was gonna say this. That's some 1984 vocabulary man.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A healthy person is healthy because they eat healthful foods.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Correct. Although in some places (UK) I have heard "healthy" used in the sense of healthful.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

the opposite of healthful

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Being full of health, it's proper in many situations, but not widely known.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This! Plus the ecological danger of novel organisms escaping into the wild like the rabbits in Australia.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I know the rabbits weren't GM. Modified organisms are either equally dangerous or MORE dangerous, depending on who you listen to.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yup.GMO is a umbrella term. Some GMOs are bad. Some are good and needed.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem isn't with the GMOs but the companies that lobby behind governments and hurt smaller-scale farmers. I love GMO and think...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

... that it's a field we can benefit a lot from. However, when companies lobby for usage of only their seeds in poor countries ...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

... that can't afford to buy the seeds every year, much less the license to use them, that's when problems arise.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't eat knives. They may have plenty of iron but the nickel and chromium are not good for you.

9 years ago | Likes 74 Dislikes 1

If I had a nickel for every time some snowflake liberal told me to stop eating knives

9 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 2

Buncha knaves!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You would have...one nickel

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

You are confusing alloyed metallic nickel and chromium with carbonyl nickel and hexavalent chromium. Beside, not all knives have Ni or Cr

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Well, if you're not sure which one is bad for you, best not to ingest any till you're certain...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The deadly deadly chromium.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

No, the problem is the current monopoly on agriculture. People keep deflecting that GMO's are the problem when they're not.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I thought the bad part about gmo was more glyphosate being used? Pesticide resistant means they use a fuck ton more?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

KNIVES ARE BAD. BAN KNIVES.

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 2

you're thinking guns.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

We need more knives at schools to protect us from bear attacks

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Bin that knife mate

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Not in this country, bro.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ban Pasta.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't you fucking dare!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Knive are bad, mmkay.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

So you suggest we should go back to tearing at animals with our teeth?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Found the aussie

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Calm down, Australia

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But that's not how you spell United Kingdom... then again they're well past knives, probly working on banning spoons now

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There has even been non pointy kitchen knife fuckery suggested in UK.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

... wait... y'all are being serious now? How the fuck are you supposed to core an apple?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

YEAH. WHAT THIS GUY SAID. KNIVES ARE BAD!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

In this example wild crops would really be more like knives and GMO's like guns one should probably have some reasonable restrictions.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

GUNS AND KNIVES ARE BAD. BAN ALL GUNS AND KNIVES. ONLY ALLOW CANNONS.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

CANNONS FIRE BALLS. BALLS ARE ROUND. THEY REPRESENT UNITY. BULLETS AND KNIVES ARE POINTY BAD! BAD!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Ban Mowhawks

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

HEY!! KNIVES ARE BANNED!! GET OUTTA HERE!!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Now imagine a dystopian future where you have 10,000 spoons but all you need is a knife

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Drop them on your oppressors from 10,000 feet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazy_Dog_(bomb)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

With that many spoons, you can easily use them to create a knife. Or just sharpen one spoon.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dude. Look up the Lazy Dog bomb

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I was already aware of air dropped flechettes. They actually were first used in WW I. But how are they relevant to the topic at hand?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

if we didnt have knives we wouldnt have garlic. knives for everybody!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

IT'S JUST WHAT THE VAMPIRES WANT! BAN VAMPIRES, NOT KNIVES!!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I can stand behind this.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Things are bad, they cause cancer.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

"Viewing them as a monolith" is accurate, down to the screeching, slapping the ground, shitting wildly everywhere whilst screeching.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Well, I didn't, cap, care to explain?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

2001: A Space Odyssey, the part at the beginning when the monolith appears to the pre-human ape-men.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Thanks... there's been so much political screeching and shitting recently I forgot about that

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

GMO, but one could also make a more nutritious one. The problems really come in with displacing genetically diverse wild strains (2

9 years ago | Likes 448 Dislikes 8

But broad statements that give us information on large groups is how we categorize EVERYTHING!!!!!!!!!??????..........

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I would say the problem comes when consenting to using emotion to process information.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

Much worse, just with selective breeding the common supermarket tomato looks great, but has lost its flavor - worldwide.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I have noticed this. I used to like tomatoes

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

GMO's if grown in close proximity to wild strains can cause a major loss in diversity.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

God, i love those nutritious knives, so tasty

9 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 1

i had to come back to upvote this

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Their flavor really manifests once they're heated up to 1000 degrees.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

I got a nice chuckle out of that.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. THAT KILLS THE KNIFE!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thank you! That point is widely missed ...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

I'm more worried about GMO's that are extremely pesticide resistant, meaning they could potentially use harmful amounts of pesticide.

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 4

Farmer's response would be - WHY would I waste money and use more than necessary?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There are already gmos that take advantage of naturally occurring defensive genes from other species so that they don't require additional

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Pesticides. With better technology we can eliminate the need for pesticides and herbicides entirely. Save the fucking bees too.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

People already use large amounts of them. However, some plants can be modified so that they need less pesticides. That being said, it's 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

an industry. They'll do it even if it's harmful so long as it protects their profits; the problem is really with the regulations. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Luckily, it widens their profits if their crops don't need pesticides, lowering costs. Which is why it happens.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm not sure what you mean. GMOs that are designed to be resistant to pesticides so that you have to use a lot of pesticides on them?

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Some are - problem is, some produce their pesticide themselves - we lack some of those resistances as humans, so they become harmfull

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

some are designed to be herbicide resistant, so you can dump herbicide all over the field to kill weeds w/o crop damage

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The herbicide in the spring is freshest, so delicious

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

That doesn't really make sense. I know that there are the scorpion lettuce or whatever it is that is designed to not need pesticides at all.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

The fear is that someone might make the crop pesticide resistant and then carpet bomb the field with the next Agent Orange or something.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And ending up with a monoculture that gets killed off by a newly evolved pathogen

9 years ago | Likes 353 Dislikes 9

Like the potatoe blight!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I'm moer concerned about GMO's being undertested so we end up releasing a dangerously overcompetitive plant or something.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The other "issue" with gmos is that they are often more pesticide resistant and may be sprayed w/ more/stronger pesticides. This scares ppl

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thank you! Don't here that enough here. GMO's are amazing but they are not without some risk.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

I have a hard time making people understand this. And the same goes for chemicals and natural pesticides. Long term testing is the key.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

That is an issue with literally anything that is farmed.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The thing is we already have monoculture because through normal breeding we develop strains that are more efficient than others so those (1)

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

end up being the only ones used. With GMOs you get the tools to not only make those (2)

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

breeds even more efficient, but selectively add in any resistance genes people find. (3)

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

This might be a decreasing risk as we gain more control of plant genetics.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Yea there's a lot of good with them. Lot of potential. But one issue is that genetics of conventional grain to work with haven't (1)

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Advanced as far as GMO hybrids so every time they want a new GMO hybrid they have to go in the vault to an older hybrid. Its complicated.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Isn't that the plot to Interstellar or something?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Or a monoculture that is intellectual property of some corporation. As in they own the food supply and the very nature of the food you eat.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's important to note that in the wild, these traits fade very quickly since there's less selective pressure than when cultivated by humans

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Isn't there a whole host of ancillary problems like the pesticides used create super bugs - better resistant - also the soil is devoid of..

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

nutrients and many chemicals are pumped back in, along with the gmo seeds? Lastly, I thought GMO promised more food. Food is political...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Still tons of people w/out full bellies and continually more mouth to feed. Is the GMO bruteforce method of more food, stronger food, better

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This problem already exists, though. No major cultivated cop has any genetic diversity.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Well said. Plus, megacorporations like Monsanto have 1, and only 1 goal in mind: maximize shareholder revenue at the end of the quarter. ...

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

Anything else (nutrient content, environmental damage, farm worker health etc.) is a distant secondary concern at best. Just look at ...

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 3

commercially produced "food" in the West and tell me I'm wrong. Try and tell me McDonald's offers the healthiest and most well-balanced...

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

That's actually pretty much what happened to bananas a while back with before GMO's. Apples are a high risk as well.

9 years ago | Likes 124 Dislikes 5

You guys give me hope for the future. Well informed!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The Cavendish bananas we eat now are spliced clones. This is more an example of the risks of massive mono-crop agriculture, which is just

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

how our modern ag has developed to continue to be profitable and increase yields. Large ag biz has created conformity with crops.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

And avocados!!!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yup, and grapes and several other things.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Big words tired i am

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That comment doesn't have any words over 3 syllables...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Damn I eat the crap out of both of those.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The entire fruit won't go extinct or anything, it's just the old apple varieties and the most common type of banana at risk of bad harvests.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's true! We're all eating the "new bananas"! I wonder what the old ones tasted like? We may never know.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

They were the size of a big finger and full of seeds. Google image search 'em.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The "banana" flavor in candy that so many people dislike was developed from the previous breed so, they tasted like that.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

They were the size of a big finger and full of seeds. Google image search 'em.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But there is a ton of different varieties of apple

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

1/x There are. The issue is commercial apple trees aren't grown from seeds, they're grown from cuttings which are genetically identical to

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I was about to say, conventional seeds are hardly "wild" or "genetically diverse", are lot are also copyrighted, and farmers buy them back-

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

-each harvest, just like GMO seeds

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Why would farmers buy them back if they're not engineered to last a single season? Isn't saving seeds standard practice?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That, and companies that "patent" genome strains, then litigate when someone outside uses them.

9 years ago | Likes 36 Dislikes 5

It's not like other seeds stop growing.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 4

They actually can. And anything that produces more or less financially profitable yields is already owned.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Monsanto? Monsanto

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 3

Patent should not be in quotes--patent literature explicitly states that plants are an area of innovation that may be patented.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

I put the quotes because they've used IP law (copywrite etc) as well as patent law. Not often and not recent, but iirc it has happened.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

And sue people who unwillingly have it because pollen travel. *cough* Monsanto *cough*

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Their all settle out of court so its super hard to find specific cases. They're typically giant companies.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Did you know the only time Monsanto sued farmers was either a) holding on to next gen seeds without paying for them or b) people who were -

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 5

-actively trying to steal seeds from farmers who'd bought them to use themselves. Not saying it's necessarily okay to do that but I've -

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

Next Geen seed = taking seeds from those that you just harvested from your terrains.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Also, the "terminator" gene that would starve us all in the long run of a zombie apocalypse.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Did you know the only time Monsanto sued farmers was either a) holding on to next gen seeds without paying for them or b) people who were -

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

Talking as a biologist, the main thing for nutrition is dirt health--which no big commercial farm company takes seriously and 1/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

the danger of GMO is the lack of testing for said GMOs,( plus monsanto, as a company are just assholes that need some form of governance) 2/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The actual, theoretical danger is uptake by humans of a transgenic gene/over production of proteins, that could screw us up.. 3/

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Man, if only they had developed terminator seeds that grow plants that don't produce viable seeds. Oh wait, they did and anti-GMO people 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

bitched about it and stopped them from using them. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

That's actually one of the my complaints. Patented modified life forms - forcing a monopoly.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

No they didnt... Monsanto is still doing that....

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I thought the fuss was that we don't know what impact their engineered genetics could have on our bodies long term.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

That's relevant as well. They have done studies that show they cause cancer, tumors etc. Everyone says it's not true. It is

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 7

Do you have any sources?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Start with the Seralini Study author web site http://www.gmoseralini.org/en/ - it was defamed, but that was ruled forgery by French courts.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well, you're eating the plant, not trying to make its DNA your own by breeding with it

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Or the pesticides...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

What impact do "un-engineered" genetics have on our bodies? Your stomach is pretty good at breaking things down beyond any genetics.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

we only know of a slow poison substance once we isolate it on whichever food we discover correlated with increased health issues

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

IE amino acids

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Not that their actual DNA would be toxic but that messing with the genome could cause unintended effects in the plant chemistry. Not my >

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

> opinion but it is AN opinion that's out there. I think it could be possible but I'd have to examine the evidence. Like Bill.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1