There are valid reasons people look at it that way.
Have a look at a climate summit and see the so-called grassroot organisations with the there-ain't-any-human-influence glossy folders, then do some research and find out that they are frontgroups of the oil industry.
I'm more in the genetic world than in the climate scene, and in this world it is SO common that pro-GM sounds turn out to be astroturf. Recent example:
+ INDUSTRY FUNDED LOBBY GROUP IN CURITIBA Among the pro-biotech lobby groups active in Curitiba, Brazil, at the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety meeting and the Convention on Biological Diversity, was the Public Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI) - a pro-GM lobby which fielded over 40 representatives, mostly picked from the developing world and trained and scripted by PRRI, to promote identical goals to those of industry. Although PRRI poses as the voice of public sector researchers, its leading lights have close links to the biotech industry which is also among PRRI's financial backers, as is the US Grains Council, which represents the interests of US producers and exporters of GM crops. http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6336 http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6356
Or what about the staging of African 'independent' scientists in favour of GMO?
- I AM naive:). But I do see a more professional & organised construction of deception on the conservative side.
- Indian cotton farmers: I'm glad you read it! As you can see this article is a copy of an original by 'Ohmy News'. GM Watch is usually well informed, and chose the critical side. The hurray stories are on the other site. The only case i found they did not write the story right was in the first explanation of the problem with biofuels. That improved later.
Well the original story, naive AC, says:
"The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client."
Some detective work on where he mailed from. But don't tell them, they made this mistake before, and will hopefully do it again. "Monsanto's PR firm admits involvement in e-mail campaign to discredit scientists" (2002) http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/1007 6.htm
Michael Moore is clear: he says who he is, and what his opinion is. I assume he is not payed by companies to do his work. Prove me wrong if you can.
You may say he is selective and slightly manipulative, others may call that professional, but anyway everything he claims is pretty much backed by facts, otherwise he would most probably have been sued for libel or slander. Or do you know somethign I missed?
Trying to make it look as if there is a grassroot movement.
It's like the prefab letters (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3190934.st m) from soldiers in Iraq, in local newspapers.
It's like producing thousands of letters-from-the-public to look to be genuinely written by granny's. ("In 2001, the Los Angeles Times accused Microsoft of astroturfing when hundreds of similar letters were sent to newspapers voicing disagreement with the United States Department of Justice and its antitrust suit against Microsoft. The letters, prepared by Americans for Technology Leadership, had in some cases been mailed from deceased citizens or nonexistent addresses. [3]" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)
It's like writing that Indians will be oh so happy with GMO cotton (http://www.newkerala.com/news3.php?action=fullnew s&id=31418), while it failed and ruined poor farmers (http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6737).
That's LYING and CHEATING for profit. That's the problem.
You would need to slightly extend the hat so it covers your entire body. A tin foil suit.
Keep the slits for your eyes and mouth smaller than 15cm, then you're also protected against GMS/UMTS.
And remember, if you are hit by lightning, not to kiss the ground before you make your tinfoil touch something grounded (and i'm not talking about pepper).
It is rather unlikely that one cure will work against several types of cancer, but I do not know much about the differences between cancers and the similarities. If they would have presented these cancers as related, I would be more inclined to find this a likely story.
Please do not rely on The Establishment or Corporations for truth. For one, that would be a logical fallacy. You probably have heard about science experts in the same field with veeeery different opinions that often are conflicting. Climate. Evolution. Relativity.
Recently we've seen the fall of that Korean cloning hero. We've seen a GMO medicine make people very ill.
Scientists need money and employment and there are numerous examples (oops, being retoric again) of scientists making their results look much better than they should be.
I have no medical background but as a biologist I have an idea of the mechanisms involved, and I think one should be very critical about these sorts of panacae.
Knowing there are totally different mechanisms behind cancer, the bit "Using several different mouse cancer types, such as leukemia, lymphoma, liver cancer, and lung cancer, it was shown that the SR/CR mouse was resistant to all of them." (http://www1.wfubmc.edu/pathresearch/srmouse/part1 .htm) rings alarmbells about the reliability of this report.
AC, your response looks like a reflex to me: somebody is not 100% behind the president so... he must hate America? Or... "Who's not with us is against us?" Remember what happened to that other country that was afraid of dissidents?
"I worked with the autistic population for about 7 years." Ah! You might be able to help me. Once every while you have these people that are, as we say in our language, 'sticking'. They won't take hints that the conversation finished, maybe like the autistic people they made this signaller for. Maybe my toolkit is a bit small, like saying "wellllll.... 't was nice talking to you" ("yes! yes! it is! bla bla etcetera bla") and staring at my watch, that's about it. Now what is the least rude, most helpful way and effective way to let them know?
Hm it does make me think, your remark. Imagine a drop of water splashes out of the bucket you are spinning. It would not follow the circular movement. It would just fly away. So if one jumps in this artif. gravity spaceship, where does one land? Not on the same spot one jumped from, I presume?
Slashdot Mirror
search engine, 1st likely hit: http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/ui/overvie w.mspx
fake, as in
1 an object which is made to look real or valuable in order to deceive people
2 someone who is not what or whom they say they are
There are valid reasons people look at it that way.
o up
Have a look at a climate summit and see the so-called grassroot organisations with the there-ain't-any-human-influence glossy folders, then do some research and find out that they are frontgroups of the oil industry.
I'm more in the genetic world than in the climate scene, and in this world it is SO common that pro-GM sounds turn out to be astroturf. Recent example:
+ INDUSTRY FUNDED LOBBY GROUP IN CURITIBA
Among the pro-biotech lobby groups active in Curitiba, Brazil, at the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety meeting and the Convention on Biological Diversity, was the Public Research and Regulation Initiative (PRRI) - a pro-GM lobby which fielded over 40 representatives, mostly picked from the developing world and trained and scripted by PRRI, to promote identical goals to those of industry. Although PRRI poses as the voice of public sector researchers, its leading lights have close links to the biotech industry which is also among PRRI's financial backers, as is the US Grains Council, which represents the interests of US producers and exporters of GM crops.
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6336
http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6356
Or what about the staging of African 'independent' scientists in favour of GMO?
There are even trainings in astroturf:
In Australia they actually train people to set up fake grassroot organisations.
http://www.overlandexpress.org/183_wilson.html
The organisation this whole topic started with, who seems to be behind the (really bad) video, organises fake grassroot stuff: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=DCI_Gr
- I AM naive :). But I do see a more professional & organised construction of deception on the conservative side.
- Indian cotton farmers: I'm glad you read it! As you can see this article is a copy of an original by 'Ohmy News'. GM Watch is usually well informed, and chose the critical side. The hurray stories are on the other site. The only case i found they did not write the story right was in the first explanation of the problem with biofuels. That improved later.
Find the most recent news overview http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6849 for a wider view.
Also a simple check on the reliable as ever internet makes the republicanity of DCI pretty clear.o up
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=DCI_Gr
Well the original story, naive AC, says: "The film actually came from a slick Republican public relations firm called DCI, which just happens to have oil giant Exxon as a client."
Some detective work on where he mailed from. But don't tell them, they made this mistake before, and will hopefully do it again.7 6.htm
"Monsanto's PR firm admits involvement in e-mail campaign to discredit scientists"
(2002)
http://www.ethicalinvesting.com/monsanto/news/100
Not getting the point?
Michael Moore is clear: he says who he is, and what his opinion is. I assume he is not payed by companies to do his work. Prove me wrong if you can.
You may say he is selective and slightly manipulative, others may call that professional, but anyway everything he claims is pretty much backed by facts, otherwise he would most probably have been sued for libel or slander.
Or do you know somethign I missed?
The big deal here is the dishonesty.
t m) from soldiers in Iraq, in local newspapers.
w s&id=31418), while it failed and ruined poor farmers (http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=6737).
Trying to make it look as if there is a grassroot movement.
It's like the prefab letters (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3190934.s
It's like producing thousands of letters-from-the-public to look to be genuinely written by granny's. ("In 2001, the Los Angeles Times accused Microsoft of astroturfing when hundreds of similar letters were sent to newspapers voicing disagreement with the United States Department of Justice and its antitrust suit against Microsoft. The letters, prepared by Americans for Technology Leadership, had in some cases been mailed from deceased citizens or nonexistent addresses. [3]" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing)
It's like writing that Indians will be oh so happy with GMO cotton (http://www.newkerala.com/news3.php?action=fullne
That's LYING and CHEATING for profit. That's the problem.
You would need to slightly extend the hat so it covers your entire body. A tin foil suit.
Keep the slits for your eyes and mouth smaller than 15cm, then you're also protected against GMS/UMTS.
And remember, if you are hit by lightning, not to kiss the ground before you make your tinfoil touch something grounded (and i'm not talking about pepper).
DISCLAIMER: duh.
I just don't eat no Ham nor Spam - all commercial looking mails go down the drain, or in the bitbucket if you like. Call me a cybervegetarian. :)
hm that's puzzling. For me it works patently in FF but Thunderbird has many bugs in C&P.
It is rather unlikely that one cure will work against several types of cancer, but I do not know much about the differences between cancers and the similarities. If they would have presented these cancers as related, I would be more inclined to find this a likely story.
Please do not rely on The Establishment or Corporations for truth. For one, that would be a logical fallacy. You probably have heard about science experts in the same field with veeeery different opinions that often are conflicting. Climate. Evolution. Relativity.
Recently we've seen the fall of that Korean cloning hero.
We've seen a GMO medicine make people very ill.
Scientists need money and employment and there are numerous examples (oops, being retoric again) of scientists making their results look much better than they should be.
I have no medical background but as a biologist I have an idea of the mechanisms involved, and I think one should be very critical about these sorts of panacae.
Knowing there are totally different mechanisms behind cancer, the bit "Using several different mouse cancer types, such as leukemia, lymphoma, liver cancer, and lung cancer, it was shown that the SR/CR mouse was resistant to all of them." (http://www1.wfubmc.edu/pathresearch/srmouse/part1 .htm)
rings alarmbells about the reliability of this report.
What's your opinion on that?
I don't get it. Grandparent says testing on humans would be better than on rats. Now why would you spoil resources by using lawyers?
AC, your response looks like a reflex to me: somebody is not 100% behind the president so... he must hate America? Or... "Who's not with us is against us?"
Remember what happened to that other country that was afraid of dissidents?
PS if your reply was ironic, I apologize.
Hm, there was something about the market mechanism and 'monopolizing'...
Don't they want to say step-length?
I agree except for the expected yield increase by GM; i don't think GM has shown that [yet?].
"I worked with the autistic population for about 7 years."
Ah! You might be able to help me. Once every while you have these people that are, as we say in our language, 'sticking'. They won't take hints that the conversation finished, maybe like the autistic people they made this signaller for. Maybe my toolkit is a bit small, like saying "wellllll.... 't was nice talking to you" ("yes! yes! it is! bla bla etcetera bla") and staring at my watch, that's about it.
Now what is the least rude, most helpful way and effective way to let them know?
Step into any OS development team and you'll soon find out why people fork.
Hm it does make me think, your remark. Imagine a drop of water splashes out of the bucket you are spinning. It would not follow the circular movement. It would just fly away. So if one jumps in this artif. gravity spaceship, where does one land? Not on the same spot one jumped from, I presume?
The feature being to teach you to turn off electrical equipment when not in use ? ;)
Second? I see they made a division between 'new' and 'upgraded'.Sage is 'upgraded'.
Web Developer may be totally useless for end-users, but for web page developers it is amazing, it is really grabbing the html by the balls.