21–30 of 49 posts
We are doomed because big business is protected by politicians on both sides. It's too late now and it will never be banned. And why the heck does the USA continue to do welfare for the corn industry which is massively profitable.
[0] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Banana_republ...
http://www.mindfully.org/GE/2005/Modified-Soya-Rats10oct05.h...
Similar to this case, it is also probably caused by RoundUp herbicide, rather that GM itself, but anyway numbers are dreadful.
British scientist (GMO advocate) that was payed by gov to figure out how to test for safety at GMO foods. He discovered that generic process (not the insecticide) of GM was probably the reason for smaller brains, livers and testicles..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is what you'd expect from the company who produces GM corn. Any third-party non-partial analyses of papers by those same authors?
Sorry, accidental downvote (big thumb, small screen). I'd like to add that, partiality aside, the Monsanto's argument is fallatious and unconvincing (appeal to authority). Give me data from independent, properly designed studies, not the mere opinion of experts.
Define coherence K as cardinality of (P1 & P2 &... &Pn) | (D1 & D2 &...&Dn).
Varjag's conjecture: as n approaches infinity, K asymptotically approaches zero. Therefore if true, the argument from authority is rendered relevant.
(the proof is left as an exercise to a reader)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, accidental downvote (big thumb, small screen). I'd like to add that, partiality aside, the Monsanto's argument is fallatious and unconvincing (appeal to authority). Give me data from independent, properly designed studies, not the mere opinion of experts.
Consider a set of politicized disciplines, S1, S2, .. Sn (e.g. climate science, GM foods research). Let P1, P2.. Pn be proponents of prevailing theory in respective discipline, and D1, D2, ...Dn be their detractors. Define coherence K as cardinality of (P1 & P2 &... &Pn) | (D1 & D2 &...&Dn). Varjag's conjecture: as n approaches infinity, K asymptotically approaches zero. Therefore if true, the argument from authority…
P_i and D_i are sets of proponenents/detractors for discipline S_i, right?
I so, I assume that the & and | boolean operators you use are substitutes for set union and intersection, respectively.
Assuming that the opinions on the various topics are independent, I would rather see K tend to
\sum |P_i| == \sum |D_i|
___
Also, for my previous post:
s/(appeal to authority)/(appeal to potentially corrupt authority)/Study from 2009. I wonder why I haven't heard much about this.
Either because it was debunked or because corn farmers have a large lobby/subsidies/etc. Take your pick, though the first theory is probably easier to prove that the second one.
We are doomed because big business is protected by politicians on both sides. It's too late now and it will never be banned. And why the heck does the USA continue to do welfare for the corn industry which is massively profitable.
One might also say that politicians are protected by big business. The problem isn't one particular group, but that the system has been perverted so that this symbiosis is profitable for both groups.
why the heck does the USA continue to do welfare for the corn industry
Read up on public choice economics: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Public_choice...
Even if this is true, the way it's written qualifies it as (not necessarily deliberate) scaremongering, as it identifies the commonality between the experimental varieties of corn as being that they were genetically modified, rather than that they were genetically modified to produce pesticides. The latter could plausibly have such a uniform effect, whereas the former could not. They need to be precise and say what t…
The suspect species of corn (and soy, for that matter) with genes to produce pesticides, however, might cross-pollinate. In that case, it's not only GM corn that's suspect, but all corn.
edit... I still don't think it's clear whether the problem is with the gene producing pesticide, or excessive external pesticide/herbicide use.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consider a set of politicized disciplines, S1, S2, .. Sn (e.g. climate science, GM foods research). Let P1, P2.. Pn be proponents of prevailing theory in respective discipline, and D1, D2, ...Dn be their detractors. Define coherence K as cardinality of (P1 & P2 &... &Pn) | (D1 & D2 &...&Dn). Varjag's conjecture: as n approaches infinity, K asymptotically approaches zero. Therefore if true, the argument from authority…
I'm not sure I follow you. P_i and D_i are sets of proponenents/detractors for discipline S_i, right? I so, I assume that the & and | boolean operators you use are substitutes for set union and intersection, respectively. Assuming that the opinions on the various topics are independent, I would rather see K tend to \sum |P_i| == \sum |D_i| What am I missing? ___ Also, for my previous post: s/(appeal to authority)/(ap…
Given enough controversial subjects people care for, no one is going to be knowledgeable in all of them. But people invoke "arguing from authority is a fallacy" only when they are not sided with the said authority.