TOTALLY GEEKED!

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

RE: Our Government Is Ruining Dishwashers

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.

Except if you get it in your Christmas stocking...

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

A lot of coal miners were put out of work here due to new regs. Yeah, let's just all sit in a tent and do nothing so there is no environmental "impact". Not sure why we are not allowed to leave "footprints" as if that is a bad thing. Energy has improved the lives of billions of people and lifted them out of squalor and poverty, which Dems are supposedly sooo concerned about. Yet, their energy polices make people poorer, impoverish more people and leave more people living in squalor.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.
Except if you get it in your Christmas stocking...
flan

Not for me. We value coal here.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Coal is being "rediscovered".

However, it is dangerous to mine.

It does need better work regulations.

And once it is gone, well, it don't grow back.

I am, in no way, knocking it.

Just being realistic.

We are going to need to develop multiple, practical forms of energy for multiple places.

And every form of energy takes another form of energy to produce.

So there is no "one size fits all" solution.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Coal is being "rediscovered".

However, it is dangerous to mine.

It does need better work regulations.

And once it is gone, well, it don't grow back.

I am, in no way, knocking it.

Just being realistic.

We are going to need to develop multiple, practical forms of energy for multiple places.

And every form of energy takes another form of energy to produce.

So there is no "one size fits all" solution.

OK so once it's gone and doesn't grow back means what exactly? So, what purpose is served to leave it unmined and not used? What purpose is served to not use the oil beneath our feet because then it will be "gone"? What eartly good is there to leave it in the ground unused? I think God has blessed this planet in abundance. There is more oil than ever. The "we are gonna run out" is just yet another pack of lies. But, ok, if we run out, then we will use our ingenuity for another source. And, that source would be nuclear if we want to actually use our brains for efficient energy needs without the idiot scaremongers. But we have oil, natural gas and coal aplenty. There is NO REASON to not use it. Yeah, mining is dangerous. Guess what? A lot of jobs are dangerous. Being a cop is dangerous. Building skyscrapers is dangerous. Enviros want to regulate coal into extinction. The safety issues are just their excuse to do so. Do you know any coal miners? I do. They are hard working men who loved being miners and they have safety rules and regulations. Now, they can't provide for their families. Oh, they are 'safe". Uh huh. Safe to do what now? Live in poverty ? Not make a better life for their kids? This is a coal area and it has wreaked devastation on the lives of families for whom this was their livelihood.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The so called "greenies " judge anyone living slightly MORE than them as wrong, cuz of course, they are "just right'. So, if they take a trip and fly across the country using jet fuel their trip is "justified" but yours isn't. If you are smart enough to know that flourescent lights contain mercury and prefer incandescant then of course you are wrong. If you demonstrate to them that using paper bags puts a bigger "footprint" on the environment than plastic, they will ignore that. They seem to have no problem drinking endless plastic bottles of bottled water to toss in the landfill. They seem to have no problem remodeling their homes and tossing perfectly serviceable things into the landfill. They seem to have no problem justifying everything they do and pointing out that someone is wrong, usually a conservative or Republican, while they ignore the gross spending and consumption of the liberals who preach at us to use one square of toilet paper from their lavish mansions.

And at least one I know argues that genetically modified food and higher and higher levels of pesticides and herbicides are perfectly fine. So, limit carbon footprints, but poisoning the world is just fine. Who could that be? And no, Husker, I'm not talking about you - you don't qualify as someone who strikes me as an environmentalist.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's Obama's carbon footprint? Doesnt faze him to hop Airforce one or golf on lushly watered courses. Uh huh.
I hate to tell you but golf courses are watered & cared for whether or not the POTUS happens to be there or not.
flan

That's really irrelevant. A true environmentalist wouldn't use them on principal. Because if no one used them, they wouldn't be around.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

They have decided that only they "CARE" about the environment. That if you don't live life according to their prescription then you don't "care" which is total bunk.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's Obama's carbon footprint? Doesnt faze him to hop Airforce one or golf on lushly watered courses. Uh huh.
I hate to tell you but golf courses are watered & cared for whether or not the POTUS happens to be there or not.
flan
That's really irrelevant. A true environmentalist wouldn't use them on principal. Because if no one used them, they wouldn't be around.

The retired yuppies would rise up in revolt!

And the market for plaid shorts...

flan

I know what to do_sometimes · Frozen Sucks!

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
A lot of coal miners were put out of work here due to new regs. Yeah, let's just all sit in a tent and do nothing so there is no environmental "impact". Not sure why we are not allowed to leave "footprints" as if that is a bad thing. Energy has improved the lives of billions of people and lifted them out of squalor and poverty, which Dems are supposedly sooo concerned about. Yet, their energy polices make people poorer, impoverish more people and leave more people living in squalor.

I heard it was as much as 40,000 decent paying jobs that were lost. And those are just the "direct" jobs. It caused whole economic meltdowns in many regions. Very Sad.

I know what to do_sometimes · Frozen Sucks!

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's Obama's carbon footprint? Doesnt faze him to hop Airforce one or golf on lushly watered courses. Uh huh.
I hate to tell you but golf courses are watered & cared for whether or not the POTUS happens to be there or not.
flan
That's really irrelevant. A true environmentalist wouldn't use them on principal. Because if no one used them, they wouldn't be around.

Golf courses are not just watered, pesticides and other chemicals are used to keep the course clean. Not so green me thinks!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

But, we might not have coal and jobs and men earning livings. We have golf courses for the rich yuppies to golf on. Just keep all those impoverished people out of sight please!

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Coal is being "rediscovered".

However, it is dangerous to mine.

It does need better work regulations.

And once it is gone, well, it don't grow back.

I am, in no way, knocking it.

Just being realistic.

We are going to need to develop multiple, practical forms of energy for multiple places.

And every form of energy takes another form of energy to produce.

So there is no "one size fits all" solution.
OK so once it's gone and doesn't grow back means what exactly? So, what purpose is served to leave it unmined and not used? What purpose is served to not use the oil beneath our feet because then it will be "gone"? What eartly good is there to leave it in the ground unused? I think God has blessed this planet in abundance. There is more oil than ever. The "we are gonna run out" is just yet another pack of lies. But, ok, if we run out, then we will use our ingenuity for another source. And, that source would be nuclear if we want to actually use our brains for efficient energy needs without the idiot scaremongers. But we have oil, natural gas and coal aplenty. There is NO REASON to not use it. Yeah, mining is dangerous. Guess what? A lot of jobs are dangerous. Being a cop is dangerous. Building skyscrapers is dangerous. Enviros want to regulate coal into extinction. The safety issues are just their excuse to do so. Do you know any coal miners? I do. They are hard working men who loved being miners and they have safety rules and regulations. Now, they can't provide for their families. Oh, they are 'safe". Uh huh. Safe to do what now? Live in poverty ? Not make a better life for their kids? This is a coal area and it has wreaked devastation on the lives of families for whom this was their livelihood.

So. In the meantime, we do what we can.

Hey. I have ZERO problem with using fossil fuels.

I also have ZERO problem developing new, more renewable and efficient sources.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The so called "greenies " judge anyone living slightly MORE than them as wrong, cuz of course, they are "just right'. So, if they take a trip and fly across the country using jet fuel their trip is "justified" but yours isn't. If you are smart enough to know that flourescent lights contain mercury and prefer incandescant then of course you are wrong. If you demonstrate to them that using paper bags puts a bigger "footprint" on the environment than plastic, they will ignore that. They seem to have no problem drinking endless plastic bottles of bottled water to toss in the landfill. They seem to have no problem remodeling their homes and tossing perfectly serviceable things into the landfill. They seem to have no problem justifying everything they do and pointing out that someone is wrong, usually a conservative or Republican, while they ignore the gross spending and consumption of the liberals who preach at us to use one square of toilet paper from their lavish mansions.
And at least one I know argues that genetically modified food and higher and higher levels of pesticides and herbicides are perfectly fine. So, limit carbon footprints, but poisoning the world is just fine. Who could that be? And no, Husker, I'm not talking about you - you don't qualify as someone who strikes me as an environmentalist.

Nice passive-aggressive dig.

Don't be shy.

And no. I don't have a problem with pesticides, and in some applications, growth hormones.

I'm not going to pretend those are all together the worse things ever.

They have a place and a use.

Doesn't mean I can't understand the impact of environmental dangers.

It means I don't have some rose tinted glasses, pie in the sky view of the world.

Practical has become a dirty word.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.

You might want to visit Hawaii.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
You might want to visit Hawaii.
flan

I live in Pennsylvania. Solar ain't gonna cut it.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.

I'm not. Where am I saying there is only one way?

I'm saying, we need practical, feasible, efficient means of producing power.

And that means different things depending on where you are.

Seeing the big picture is not being wishy washy.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
I'm not. Where am I saying there is only one way?
I'm saying, we need practical, feasible, efficient means of producing power.
And that means different things depending on where you are.

Seeing the big picture is not being wishy washy.

I didn't say there is only way. The MARKET will is always looking at new fuels. And the MARKET will come up with cost efficient and effective alternatives IF and WHEN it makes SENSE to do so. Not, off the back of some stupid govt edict.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
lilyofcourse wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
I'm not. Where am I saying there is only one way?
I'm saying, we need practical, feasible, efficient means of producing power.
And that means different things depending on where you are.

Seeing the big picture is not being wishy washy.
I didn't say there is only way. The MARKET will is always looking at new fuels. And the MARKET will come up with cost efficient and effective alternatives IF and WHEN it makes SENSE to do so. Not, off the back of some stupid govt edict.

And said different where?

huskerbb · Guru

weltschmerz wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Why are you online using electricity?
First of all. my electricity is kinetic, not coal-fired.
Secondly...why is it all or nothing with anti-environmentalists? There are many shades of grey between black and white.
Seems like unless I'm living in a cave, heating with dung and wearing hemp underpants, I'm a hypocrite.
I'm doing the best that I can.

Such ignorance.

no, the electricity you use is the same as everyone else on the grid.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
You might want to visit Hawaii.
flan
I live in Pennsylvania. Solar ain't gonna cut it.

I realize that, but windmills & solar panels can & do help.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
You might want to visit Hawaii.
flan
I live in Pennsylvania. Solar ain't gonna cut it.
I realize that, but windmills & solar panels can & do help.
flan

I am not opposed to solar panels. Windmills are horrible. They are noisy and kill a lot of birds, which i think you would oppose. Nobody wants to live near them. They are very, very inefficient. So, solar panels if they help a bit, fine. But, dont LEGISLATE that crap. Let the energy industry do it's thing.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

lilyofcourse wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The so called "greenies " judge anyone living slightly MORE than them as wrong, cuz of course, they are "just right'. So, if they take a trip and fly across the country using jet fuel their trip is "justified" but yours isn't. If you are smart enough to know that flourescent lights contain mercury and prefer incandescant then of course you are wrong. If you demonstrate to them that using paper bags puts a bigger "footprint" on the environment than plastic, they will ignore that. They seem to have no problem drinking endless plastic bottles of bottled water to toss in the landfill. They seem to have no problem remodeling their homes and tossing perfectly serviceable things into the landfill. They seem to have no problem justifying everything they do and pointing out that someone is wrong, usually a conservative or Republican, while they ignore the gross spending and consumption of the liberals who preach at us to use one square of toilet paper from their lavish mansions.
And at least one I know argues that genetically modified food and higher and higher levels of pesticides and herbicides are perfectly fine. So, limit carbon footprints, but poisoning the world is just fine. Who could that be? And no, Husker, I'm not talking about you - you don't qualify as someone who strikes me as an environmentalist.
Nice passive-aggressive dig.
Don't be shy.
And no. I don't have a problem with pesticides, and in some applications, growth hormones.
I'm not going to pretend those are all together the worse things ever.
They have a place and a use.
Doesn't mean I can't understand the impact of environmental dangers.
It means I don't have some rose tinted glasses, pie in the sky view of the world.
Practical has become a dirty word.

I wasn't talking about you, either. But if the shoe fits.....

huskerbb · Guru

Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.

That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.

Honeys_Mom · Mod & Permanent Board Sweetheart

I think it would be much more fun to talk about hemp underpants. But you know me, never the debater.... carry on. smile

Fort Worth Mom · Mod/Penguin lover/Princess!

Honeys_Mom wrote:
I think it would be much more fun to talk about hemp underpants. But you know me, never the debater.... carry on.

LOL! We love you just the way you are, Honeys! smile

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.

??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM

Honeys_Mom · Mod & Permanent Board Sweetheart

Fort Worth Mom wrote:
Honeys_Mom wrote:
I think it would be much more fun to talk about hemp underpants. But you know me, never the debater.... carry on.
LOL! We love you just the way you are, Honeys!

biggrin

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.
??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM

By who, Monsanto? It has already been proven they fix their studies and they are on trial in other countries for environmental crimes. NOTHING they say is beleivable. NOTHING.

FNW · Guru

I wish they would just grow it, pick it, ship it, sell it. Why does everything have to be processed these days.

Just curious for those who might know...when was the last time we had a locust problem?

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.
??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM
By who, Monsanto? It has already been proven they fix their studies and they are on trial in other countries for environmental crimes. NOTHING they say is beleivable. NOTHING.

???? Um, no, by independent studies conducted at several universities.

Ilumine · Regular

weltschmerz wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Why are you online using electricity?
First of all. my electricity is kinetic, not coal-fired.
Secondly...why is it all or nothing with anti-environmentalists? There are many shades of grey between black and white.
Seems like unless I'm living in a cave, heating with dung and wearing hemp underpants, I'm a hypocrite.
I'm doing the best that I can.

And conversly, why are all environmentalists all "all or nothing" when it comes to (not even touching the anti-environmentalists) the regular folk? Case in point, your immediate response to the thread and article.

There IS a middle ground, but when one side or the other spout there zealousness, it actually pushes the middle away - to the point of apathy .

huskerbb · Guru

FNW wrote:
I wish they would just grow it, pick it, ship it, sell it. Why does everything have to be processed these days.

Just curious for those who might know...when was the last time we had a locust problem?

In the US it has been since the 1930's that there has been a widespread outbreak. The 1950's since more localized events--although grasshoppers continue to be an intermittent problem.

in 2004, there was a widespread outbreak across Africa.

huskerbb · Guru

Ilumine wrote:
weltschmerz wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Why are you online using electricity?
First of all. my electricity is kinetic, not coal-fired.
Secondly...why is it all or nothing with anti-environmentalists? There are many shades of grey between black and white.
Seems like unless I'm living in a cave, heating with dung and wearing hemp underpants, I'm a hypocrite.
I'm doing the best that I can.
And conversly, why are all environmentalists all "all or nothing" when it comes to (not even touching the anti-environmentalists) the regular folk? Case in point, your immediate response to the thread and article.
There IS a middle ground, but when one side or the other spout there zealousness, it actually pushes the middle away - to the point of apathy .

Nobody is really an "anti-environmentalist". People just disagree on what the problems are, and what are the best solutions.

chef · Guru

weltschmerz wrote:
chef wrote:
weltschmerz wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Why are you online using electricity?
First of all. my electricity is kinetic, not coal-fired.
Secondly...why is it all or nothing with anti-environmentalists? There are many shades of grey between black and white.
Seems like unless I'm living in a cave, heating with dung and wearing hemp underpants, I'm a hypocrite.
I'm doing the best that I can.
Explain?
http://www.hydroquebec.com/about-hydro-quebec/our-energy/hydropower/clean-renewable.html

I didn't know hydro power was kinetic. That's interesting.

Riding · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.

I 10000% agree

they surface mine the coal here where I live.

Riding · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.
Except if you get it in your Christmas stocking...
flan
Not for me. We value coal here.

My husband has worked at a surface coal mine for 35 years, it was his first job after he left the ranch and went to college. He operates a dragline. Our coal powered power plants DO NOT spew black smoke into the air, our roads etc. ARE NOT covered in black coal. Coal mined here burns clean.

I GET so so tired of some of the ignorance of the truth in this. ARGH they hate it then turn off anything run by electricity in your home, no cell phones, TV, tablets, etc. and YOUR electric car....that is charged with electricity. your home is heated and cooled with some form of electricity. I am not going to argue or debate, but I could not stay quiet. this is affecting our town, our state and our families

Riding · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Oh quit being wishy washy. You know that windmills and solar panels are not going to power America. Sheesh.
You might want to visit Hawaii.
flan
I live in Pennsylvania. Solar ain't gonna cut it.
I realize that, but windmills & solar panels can & do help.
flan

windmills and wind turbines and the like kill more birds that people realize. they also affect livestock and wild life negatively. Not saying it could not become something to use, but right now? no and I do not understand the need to make huge changes "right now" not looking into the big picture.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.
??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM
By who, Monsanto? It has already been proven they fix their studies and they are on trial in other countries for environmental crimes. NOTHING they say is beleivable. NOTHING.
???? Um, no, by independent studies conducted at several universities.

No. American university studies have shown to be funded by Monsanto. They are worthless. And that is proven by every study NOT funded by Monsanto finding the opposite. Don't you read the news on this stuff. It's been all over that American university studies on the subject are bought and paid for.

Riding · Guru

just wanted to share some pictures of the surface coal mine my husband works at

Spoiler

this is a coal train going through the silos

Spoiler

a view from a distance

Spoiler

a haul truck that carries the coal from the pit where the dragline digs it (if the mine has draglines, not all do, coal is loaded with huge shovels and transported to the silos, where it is loaded onto the 155 car coal trains.

Spoiler

this is one of the areas the mine reclaimed after mining it, they often male it better than it was, and ensure that the wildlife etc. will be able to live on it. most mines have elk, deer and antelope running free all over them.

just wanted to share some of my husbands job

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

The pics won't open on my computer! But, we have great respect for coal miners in my area. I thank them for doing a very hard, dirty, dangerous and necessary job. ANd, they love it as well.

Riding · Guru

thanks LGS. I think there is underground mining in your area? we have the surface mines. IMHO they all provide a product that enables many to enjoy power.

I just pray that is all resolved and quickly and fairly.

gas was $1.70 this morning and diesel $1.95, that made my heart hurt, there are many families in our town and area that are being affected by this too. the price of oil is dropping so fast......

huskerbb · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.
??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM
By who, Monsanto? It has already been proven they fix their studies and they are on trial in other countries for environmental crimes. NOTHING they say is beleivable. NOTHING.
???? Um, no, by independent studies conducted at several universities.
No. American university studies have shown to be funded by Monsanto. They are worthless. And that is proven by every study NOT funded by Monsanto finding the opposite. Don't you read the news on this stuff. It's been all over that American university studies on the subject are bought and paid for.

You are simply wrong. There has not been one independent study that has shown wghat you say--and several that have debunked that nonsense.

some nutbpjobs blog is not news.

try reading the national Academy of Sciences. It is in one of their publications.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 01:50:42 PM

TrudyML · Guru

Riding wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
What's wrong with coal? Not a damn thing.
I 10000% agree

they surface mine the coal here where I live.

<clap>

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
Genetically modified food is perfectly fine. We don't have ever increasing levels of pesticides.
That is untrue. You are just putting them IN the food instead of spraying them on top of it. You are also killing the bees and butterflies, which the world NEEDS. And that's a proven fact so don't bother to deny it.
??? No, the butterfly thing has been widely debuked. It is absolutely untrue.

the bee one ihas not been proven, but what they are looking at in that regard has NOTHING to do with GMOs.

also, neither of those things have anything to do with your original statement.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Friday 15th of January 2016 10:07:28 AM
By who, Monsanto? It has already been proven they fix their studies and they are on trial in other countries for environmental crimes. NOTHING they say is beleivable. NOTHING.
???? Um, no, by independent studies conducted at several universities.
No. American university studies have shown to be funded by Monsanto. They are worthless. And that is proven by every study NOT funded by Monsanto finding the opposite. Don't you read the news on this stuff. It's been all over that American university studies on the subject are bought and paid for.
You are simply wrong. There has not been one independent study that has shown wghat you say--and several that have debunked that nonsense.
some nutbpjobs blog is not news.

Bull. They don't get to rely on the studies they influence to prove their points. Other countries are not buying it and doing their own studies and banning it. You are losing, anyway. The tide has turned. None of the promises made are coming true and problems are being found left and right.