"if they are tested for safety properly"
Right. With emphasis on "properly". Any GMO research done by the industry itself can obviously not be trusted, unless you are extremely naive and gullible. Let's see what independent researchers say about it: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/13/opinion/la-oe-guriansherman-seeds-20110213
Oh, wait.
I find it pathetic that this "Anti-Science" garbage is thrown around any time someone is skeptic of something presented under the guise of "science". Perhaps that's part of the strategy though. Use some critical thinking, people, if you are capable of it.
Instead of responding to my post in an intelligent manner, you just had to resort to name-calling. It must be pretty convenient to label anyone who disagree with you as an "idiot". Do you feel better now?
And why wouldn't they? Please explain in detail why the government wouldn't, explain what they have to gain.
If you can't figure out the answer to this question on your own, you probably shouldn't be debating the issue in the first place.
Are we getting a little upset here? It seems that in debates like these on controversial subjects, no matter how valid the scientific studies are, there will always be people who dismiss them as "unscientific","anecdotal","quackery" or whatever, because they don't agree with the conclusions.
Also, it appears that, from my (possibly narrow) point of view, there are two types of "science": Real science, where real conclusions and real discoveries are made. And then there's the other kind of science, which I think is the one you're referring to. The one that governments and the "medical establishment" base their decisions on. I'd like to call it "convenient science", where their findings are uncontroversial, such as the ones that claim mercury in vaccines is harmless.
Do you really believe any government would admit in any way that there is a link between mercury in vaccines and autism? Not likely, huh? Real science has known about the toxic effects of mercury for close to 200 years. And is anyone surprised that children who are injected with massive amounts of this poison develop neurological disorders, often within days? Real science will attribute this to mercury poisoning. Convenient science will try to explain it away in terms of, "oh, it must be the environment", "bad parenting", or their favorite: genetics. The only genetic component of autism appears to be that they can't excrete the mercury as well as "normal" children.
It would probably be a better idea for the governments to rely on what the real science says, rather than just ordering scientific studies that tell them what they want to hear, which unfortunately seems to be what's happening.
I don't think the "medical establishment" (as in western medicine) is intentionally out to hurt or kill anyone. However, its "scientific" approach to health doesn't promote healing, and people are "uninentionally" killed in the process. Western medicine, with its drug based, symptom suppressing approach to health, is often more harmful than not.
As for vaccines, they are needed. Just not the mercury part of them.
Call me a conspiracy theorist all you like, but please open your mind and try to consider the possibility that there might be another side of the coin. Have a nice day:)
What kind of routers are you refering to? Home NAT routers or real, ISP-class routers? I can assure you that the latter won't be bothered specifically by P2P activity, due to the fact that they don't track connections, something which NAT routers obviously do.
Slashdot Mirror
"if they are tested for safety properly" Right. With emphasis on "properly". Any GMO research done by the industry itself can obviously not be trusted, unless you are extremely naive and gullible. Let's see what independent researchers say about it: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/13/opinion/la-oe-guriansherman-seeds-20110213 Oh, wait. I find it pathetic that this "Anti-Science" garbage is thrown around any time someone is skeptic of something presented under the guise of "science". Perhaps that's part of the strategy though. Use some critical thinking, people, if you are capable of it.
And why wouldn't they? Please explain in detail why the government wouldn't, explain what they have to gain.
If you can't figure out the answer to this question on your own, you probably shouldn't be debating the issue in the first place.
It seems that the formatting got screwed up a bit. Sorry about that.
Are we getting a little upset here? It seems that in debates like these on controversial subjects, no matter how valid the scientific studies are, there will always be people who dismiss them as "unscientific","anecdotal","quackery" or whatever, because they don't agree with the conclusions. Also, it appears that, from my (possibly narrow) point of view, there are two types of "science": Real science, where real conclusions and real discoveries are made. And then there's the other kind of science, which I think is the one you're referring to. The one that governments and the "medical establishment" base their decisions on. I'd like to call it "convenient science", where their findings are uncontroversial, such as the ones that claim mercury in vaccines is harmless. Do you really believe any government would admit in any way that there is a link between mercury in vaccines and autism? Not likely, huh? Real science has known about the toxic effects of mercury for close to 200 years. And is anyone surprised that children who are injected with massive amounts of this poison develop neurological disorders, often within days? Real science will attribute this to mercury poisoning. Convenient science will try to explain it away in terms of, "oh, it must be the environment", "bad parenting", or their favorite: genetics. The only genetic component of autism appears to be that they can't excrete the mercury as well as "normal" children. It would probably be a better idea for the governments to rely on what the real science says, rather than just ordering scientific studies that tell them what they want to hear, which unfortunately seems to be what's happening. I don't think the "medical establishment" (as in western medicine) is intentionally out to hurt or kill anyone. However, its "scientific" approach to health doesn't promote healing, and people are "uninentionally" killed in the process. Western medicine, with its drug based, symptom suppressing approach to health, is often more harmful than not. As for vaccines, they are needed. Just not the mercury part of them. Call me a conspiracy theorist all you like, but please open your mind and try to consider the possibility that there might be another side of the coin. Have a nice day :)
You shouldn't judge a book by its cover.
I'll assume that you didn't actually watch it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6890106663412840646&ei=XRZpS7qHBIbL-Aazy6DzCw
Recommended reading on the topic of "alternative medicine": http://kingmaker.net/DeadDoctorstxt.html
Actually, sometimes it doesn't blend: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a78-aqY_FU
What kind of routers are you refering to? Home NAT routers or real, ISP-class routers? I can assure you that the latter won't be bothered specifically by P2P activity, due to the fact that they don't track connections, something which NAT routers obviously do.