Kooky beliefs: Why?

[Lexicus]

What about GMOs? Kooky or not kooky?

Depends. Belief in a conspiracy to suppress scientific information to the effect that GMOs are more harmful to human health than non-GMO food is pretty kooky. Concern about the business practices of companies like Monsanto or more generally the ethics of genetic engineering (like, where do we draw the line with this? is it ethical to genetically engineer humans? and so on)? Not as kooky.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

Depends. Belief in a conspiracy to suppress scientific information to the effect that GMOs are more harmful to human health than non-GMO food is pretty kooky. Concern about the business practices of companies like Monsanto or more generally the ethics of genetic engineering (like, where do we draw the line with this? is it ethical to genetically engineer humans? and so on)? Not as kooky.

Surpressing scientific information isnt something one has to believe to - its an everyday reality in most of the fields of science. Could Monsantos business practise involve supression of scientific research in some way? I bet it could.

 

[tetley]

In GMO's defense, GMO has saved literally millions of lives. Fending off mass starvation is the reason GMO was invented. Ethically, I think of GMO like an ambulance: ambulances are bad for you, because they burn fossil fuels and emit pollutants into the environment. Maybe mankind can improve and create Tesla ambulances.

Ethically, I consider Monsanto a racket, though. I regard Monsanto like a tank: tanks harm people by emitting pollutants, too. No point inventing Tesla tanks (unless you like Red Alert 2)--we would all be better off just getting rid of the tanks altogether. Besides, tanks might have a few things just a little more harmful to you than their air exhaust.

 

[timtofly]

In GMO's defense, GMO has saved literally millions of lives. Fending off mass starvation is the reason GMO was invented. Ethically, I think of GMO like an ambulance: ambulances are bad for you, because they burn fossil fuels and emit pollutants into the environment. Maybe mankind can improve and create Tesla ambulances.

Ethically, I consider Monsanto a racket, though. I regard Monsanto like a tank: tanks harm people by emitting pollutants, too. No point inventing Tesla tanks (unless you like Red Alert 2)--we would all be better off just getting rid of the tanks altogether. Besides, tanks might have a few things just a little more harmful to you than their air exhaust.

Monsanto is the tank to prevent the possibility of someone robbing those GMO food delivery trucks. It would all work just fine, if the government stopped padding the pockets of the needless government bureaucracy and those humans sitting in the tanks.

 

[Lexicus]

Surpressing scientific information isnt something one has to believe to - its an everyday reality in most of the fields of science. Could Monsantos business practise involve supression of scientific research in some way? I bet it could.

Yeah, it could, but given the thousands of studies that have been conducted, many by publicly-funded research universities and the like, on GMOs, it stretches plausibility to believe in such a conspiracy. It would have to stretch far beyond Monsanto, unlike the case of Exxon leaning on its in-house scientists to suppress information about climate change.