What's new
By:

Never Hillary

So I need to address Game's PC play.

I like some women like Margaret Thatcher, Corazon Aquino and Carly whatshername, and the other one PC lobs called a pig with lipstick.
Game shove your pseudo-superiority where the sun don't shine.

I don't like Hillary because she prostitutes high office, selling favors for cash in her accounts.

Trump doesn't do business ess that way. When he's Prez he'll be calling in those he's bought.
 
Ambrose Bierce,one man who truly influencedme, was a progressive back inhis day. He went down to help the revolution in Mexico, and got himself killed by folks inhis own side who took exception to his whiteness.

His definitions struck me as witty, but now I see i misapplied the quote.

Witch, n. An ugly and repulsive old woman in a wicked league with the devil.

2. A beautiful and attractive young woman, in wickedness a league beyond the devil.

I have no quarrel with the idea being applied with perfect symmetry on men, but I never fell in love with any man, and have rarely suffered in my relations with unpredictable behavior from that genre.

I think my wife would be the best Pres this country ever had. I intending that my daughters will be as well
 
babe said:
Trump doesn't do business ess that way. When he's Prez he'll be calling in those he's bought.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I remember when my dad told me how he and his family and the rest of Germany thought a guy named Adolph would put them on the path to righteousness.
 
str8line said:
Yeah, I remember when my dad told me how he and his family and the rest of Germany thought a guy named Adolph would put them on the path to righteousness.
Click to expand...
Whatever you remember, or think anyone remembers, there is hard do u entation that brown brothersHarriman sent a little bag runner named Prescott Bush with a satchel contains g $20M to kickstart Adolph. The Reichstag fire soon followed.

The King of England was all in,Henry Ford was all in, and JD Rockefeller was all in.

The U.S. trusts that were busted inside the States invested in German corporates, which I turn owned Adolph.

G Whiz. . . .the same folks owned both sides of the same war.

Trump orHillary, Berbie or Cruz, same dif.

I just like someone who can stand up so ehow on his own account.


Lots better than the numbly dumb,ly party regulars.
 
dalamon said:
brace urself for I hear I am narrow-minded as well.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, your views on not eating GMO's are narrow minded, and reject all the science on the subject. As do most of your views on organic farming.

That's just one example.





/love ya
//I think we're all narrow minded to a point. Just human nature.
 
Last edited:
#bern said:
With all due respect, your views on not eating GMO's are narrow minded, and reject all the science on the subject. As do most of your views on organic farming.

That's just one example.





/love ya
//I think we're all narrow minded to a point. Just human nature.
Click to expand...

Dalamon is anti-GMO? Ew.
 
Siro said:
Dalamon is anti-GMO? Ew.
Click to expand...

GMOs are completely safe for consumption, proven by years of science. The pesticides used for them aren't good, but neither are those used for non-GM crops.

GMOs being characterized as a saviour of world hunger is a marketing ploy to exploit poorer countries at the expense of the rich. Biodiverse farming practices provide a more complete repertoire of nutrition and access to food than monoculture GM crops. That's proven. Plus I think the wethical conversations surrounding GM crops are lagging behind the advancement of said sphere.


Didn't NAOS do his PhD in some sort of agra along this field? He might be the better source of info here. I'm just coming from the perspective of my GENET degree
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, I eat organic. **** DOW Jones and their "standards" of whether they consider chemicals safe or not.

I try to keep my diet as local as I can, to the extent where I can quite literally speak to and visit the farmers whom I buy stuff from. Alberta is spectacular for their agriculture, so I can basically access anything I need here. Even if I only have a 25% chance of taking in less chemicals than non-organic, shelling up the extra cash doesn't annoy me in the least of senses. I don't drink, gamble, shoot, smoke. I can afford an extra dollar for a bag of apples when they're in season
 
dalamon said:
GMOs are completely safe for consumption, proven by years of science. The pesticides used for them aren't good, but neither are those used for non-GM crops.

GMOs being characterized as a saviour of world hunger is a marketing ploy to exploit poorer countries at the expense of the rich. Biodiverse farming practices provide a moot complete repertoire of nutrition and access to food than monoculture GM crops. That's proven. Plus I think the ethical conversations surrounding GM crops are lagging behind the advancement of said sphere.


Didn't NAOS do his PhD in some sort of agra along this field? He might be the better source of info here. I'm just coming from the perspective of my GENET degree
Click to expand...

I don't know what the ultimate limits of genetic engineering are, but they will be, without a question, world-changing. We barely understand how genomes work, and as scientific understanding improves, we will move well past disease resistance and minimizing pesticide use.

Companies like Monsanto act unethically, but this is not an inherent problem with genetic engineering.

But I think your post is fair overall.
 
Siro said:
I don't know what the ultimate limits of genetic engineering are, but they will be, without a question, world-changing. We barely understand how genomes work, and as scientific understanding improves, we will move well past disease resistance and minimizing pesticide use.

Companies like Monsanto act unethically, but this is not an inherent problem with genetic engineering.

But I think your post is fair overall.
Click to expand...

My entire last semester I researched and studied ethics and genetics in for dedicated courses. It's fascinating and scary, all in one.


One other aspect that annoyed me (and something to pay attention to) is the sway that geneticists are having in nations with public healthcare, in that flash-in-the-pan genetic technologies may be securing funds for themselves, away from other social programs that might better address public health concerns.

For example, the desire to genetically sequence every kid when they're born-- how helpful will this be, how expensive will the data storage be? Who has access to the data? What if it is breached? How USEFUL is information on disease predispositions-- isn't this money used better elsewhere?
 
dalamon said:
GMOs are completely safe for consumption, proven by years of science. The pesticides used for them aren't good, but neither are those used for non-GM crops.

GMOs being characterized as a saviour of world hunger is a marketing ploy to exploit poorer countries at the expense of the rich. Biodiverse farming practices provide a more complete repertoire of nutrition and access to food than monoculture GM crops. That's proven. Plus I think the wethical conversations surrounding GM crops are lagging behind the advancement of said sphere.


Didn't NAOS do his PhD in some sort of agra along this field? He might be the better source of info here. I'm just coming from the perspective of my GENET degree
Click to expand...

I prefer this over GMO because USA sux

Kevin-Carter-Child-Vulture-Sudan.jpg
 
dalamon said:
One other aspect that annoyed me (and something to pay attention to) is the sway that geneticists are having in nations with public healthcare, in that flash-in-the-pan genetic technologies may be securing funds for themselves, away from other social programs that might better address public health concerns
Click to expand...

Kind of like how California wastes billions addressing climate change instead of diverting that money toward there lack of water issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top