Jump to content


George Rowell

Member Since 13 July 2018 - 07:48 AM
Offline Last Active Oct 13 2019 08:41 AM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Russia Investigations

15 July 2019 - 09:43 PM

 AnBr, on 15 July 2019 - 09:21 PM, said:

Talk about a non sequitur or is this an example of what-aboutism? What about the meteor that caused the K–T extinction? This is getting to be plain silly. You have to prove there is even that 0.001% chance of a danger from GMOs before weighing the risks. Are we never to try anything new because there is an unknown chance of danger? Allergens are far more likely to cause issues. Should we ban peanuts? This constant promotion of conspiracies is getting a bit tiresome.
It is NOT a non-sequitur. It is NOTHING about What-about-ism. You heard that time describing RT no doubt.

YES. If something has the potential to kill millions it should pass extreme safety tests. I am amazed that you cannot see that. Pressure groups should be kept well away from the decision making, but as it stands they are right there at the front organizing it. The FDA and the EPA are our guardians. Do you feel safe. Come on.

What is the matter with these peoples logical processes?

In Topic: Russia Investigations

15 July 2019 - 08:46 PM

 LFC, on 15 July 2019 - 09:28 AM, said:

I’m sorry but your definition of “proven link” seems to me to be a rather subjective measure. You’ve posted quite a few things where you elevated hearsay to “proof.” To say there’s no proof because a judge, who would not have access to all of the U.S. intelligence produced by about 18 agencies who all beg to differ, said so is not consistent with what you’ve found acceptable when it came to other topics. If you believe a Russian troll farm sprouted up organically without government support my immediate question would be “why the he’ll would they do that?”
You have got the hearsay and the proof inverted. The Judge said there was no proven link from the Kremlin to Troll farm. No proven link no case, just hearsay.

In Topic: Russia Investigations

15 July 2019 - 08:41 PM

 J-CA, on 15 July 2019 - 11:08 AM, said:

What gives with me is that you consistently show poor judgement and a penchant for conspiracy theories. You have exhibited many times that a hint of evidence in one direction is considered overwhelming proof while large amounts of evidence compiled over long periods of time from many sources as evidence of institutional conspiracy.

It is not a personal matter, you seem very nice and quite charming actually.

I pushed the sell button on Tesla at over 350 a long time ago, you can gloat about your profits when you cash out. That said if you think short term gains on individual stocks is a repeatable skill.. well, that would be consistent with your other examples of poor information hygiene. (Either that or I presume you are a billionaire, in which case mazel tov!)
I see you are backing off the Mr Nasty routine, if not the grandstanding bit. What is the matter, is someone getting into your personal zone?

You are completely naive to imagine the stock market is not manipulated. Do not worm about it, go ahead, tell us clearly in your view it is not. Make a fool of yourself, I am waiting.

The evidence is overwhelming. Even the NASDAQ site say it is a fact of life.

Say it. The Stock Market is not Manipulated. Go ahead.

In Topic: Russia Investigations

15 July 2019 - 08:30 PM

 AnBr, on 15 July 2019 - 09:57 AM, said:

So, for the entire population of the world *everyone* is at equal risk? Even if there is this probability of 0.001% harm no way everyone will have the same exposure. Too many variables to conclude what likely cause. Statistically insignificant. This is the equivalent of the slippery slope logical fallacy.
What about CJD? That could have wiped out Britain.

In Topic: Russia Investigations

15 July 2019 - 08:23 PM

 D. C. Sessions, on 15 July 2019 - 07:39 AM, said:

George, we've been modifying organisms for longer than I've been alive, and I don't just mean by the old process of selecting the odd results of natural variation and mutation. I mean generating orders of magnitude greater rates of mutation by means of radiation, chemical mutagens, and every other odd trick of biochemistry that we've discovered since WWII. That, curiously enough, never seems to bother anyone and we take for granted the results of those wild experiments in uncontrolled mutation. The key word being "uncontrolled."

Then we get to where we can actually choose what changes to the genome and people freak out. The most telling test of this whole psychology, to me, is that even when we're using the old accepted methods of generating mutations, it's fine as long as we don't look at the results. Do a genome sequence to find out which offspring have the desired trait without waiting for it to mature and suddenly it's blasphemy again. Remember, this has nothing to do with the mutations getting into the wild -- they're already there -- it's purely about our learning what's under the bonnet.

Do you like bananas?

Implanting genes from one species to another or one type of bacteria to another is not natural. I see the advantages of bacteria producing insulin, maybe spider silk and so on but are the rules rigorous enough to stop a tragedy? Usually rules are tightened after tragedies happen but with 7 billion people as possible victims I do not think the safeguards are any where near strong enough.

Nano creams that allow direct entry into cells maybe a good way of getting delivery but isn't that a mechanism for cancer too. We will not know for 40 years.

GM foods are shown to have different actions on the body. Again 40 years down the line we may start to find problems.

In the UK atomic power was heralded as the cheap and safe. We were told the chances of a radiation leak were less than getting hit by a meteorite. The power station at Windscale was to produce endless inexpensive risk free electricity. They lied about both. Atomic generated electricity cost dozens of times what coal fired electricity did, in part because when the fissile material was entering the best stage after two years it was all removed to make bombs. Meanwhile huge leaks of radioactive substances swept over the area. It was not reported, probably a military secret too. Much later when the local radiation was deemed to be too high, cancer jumped and owners could not sell their property. The government response was in part to re-brand Windscale and call the town Sellafield, but the radiation remains. On that list add Chernobyl, Long Island and of course Fukushima. The total death toll from these could be huge.

Again in the UK the decision to start feeding herbivors waste animal product. Little research was carried out. Enter BSE and JCD. Virtually everybody in the UK ate infected beef and by good luck if nothing else Britain was not wiped out. To this day some countries refuse blood from UK citizens.

GM seeds are in my mind another grave issue. If they reduce the biodiversity of ancient grains then we could be stuck with a few types of grain that one day may succumb to disease. Then what? Where is the research to determine that this is 99.9999999% safe? Who is it done by?

History has shown that it is no good getting people with vested interests to make decisions about the safety of these things.