Ok guys, Genetically Modified Organism refers to both "artificial selection" and "genetic engineering". But both are not the same. Artificial selection has gone on for millennia while genetic engineering has been going on for only a few decades. Genetic engineering comes in many forms: gamma ray bombardments for chaotic mutations, splicing and dicing genes, implanting and hormonal reproduction of clones can indeed create many monsters both visible and invisible. The invisible monsters and the toxins they can create with their genes are the threat here. The manufacture of biological warfare, virus engineering and playing with the elements that make up life without understanding the consequences is the threat here. The bullying of corporations playing God and patenting their spreading genes are the threat here. Not the fact that apples or cows are bred to be bigger and juicier. Give me a fucking naive simpleton break, gawd that was disappointing.

wut? Organic food refers to the process it goes through to receive organic certification - i.e. you were looking at the wrong wikipedia entry.

Try this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification

Essentially it's growing food without most of the harmful chemicals, it's therefore a sustainable farming practice. Less spray residue in the food, less toxins in the environment, better for pretty much everyone unless you are a worker at Monsanto or get paid by a political think tank.

Organic certification is not perfect however, some countries (like China) have poor certification protocols, and many countries labelling laws allow some non-organic food in an organic product and it can still be called organic.

fade has it right... and it's a valuable lesson from the science-based people I listen to on health: The dose makes the poison. You needn't worry about a "toxin" if the dose is small enough, and anything can be toxic in a high enough dose.

Okay, I will upvote but I am curious--where the hell are these hidden costs? Just because a sniper shoots you in face it doesn't mean he was hidden.

*I open door, shot in face by sniper two feet away*

The hidden secret of water? Yeah, you can get sick by drinking water with viruses or water that has been contaminated with toxins--but did you know you could also drown?! It's true!!!

Sorry, I could go on and on but I will stop. (And we cannot say the percentages are "secret" because, well, just because you don't know something doesn't mean it's "hidden")

The controlling group of men who made the decisions on Vietnam thru to Iraq, with all the bombing, drug running, kidnapping, sponsoring of death squads, torture and mass slaughter of civilians (not to mention spraying toxins on poor ghettos at home, shooting student protestors etc etc.) are in the same league. Start with the 'terror bombing' of Hiroshima and Nagasaki if you like (Curtis LeMay's words not mine). The Bush family were in from the start.

If you take this as a 'Regime', then the numbers are right up there and, as stated, operating from a dramatically more comfortable position. The historical villains mentioned all had backgrounds that any psychiatrist would ring alarm bells about and their societies were in tatters when they came to power.
But Dubya for example? Privileged draft dodging frat boy living in the most comfortable place and time in all of human history.. how many did he kill in a deceptive money grab? Oh yeah, they 'don't count dead babies'. Even the hawks are conceding its in the millions now, and that's just the last 10 years of near 70..

The issue is GMO crops designed to secrete their own pesticides (toxins).
Which is a large part of what plant GM has been about.
In animal tests, there are major health problems - but since you can't PROVE that people will react the same, sale is not prohibited.
In Europe there is more scrutiny to this, and some things actually are banned that are still permitted in the U.S.A..

-scheherazade

Toxins in plastic are harmful when chewed.
http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2012/05/plastic-is-killing-your-dog-one-bowl-toy-and-can-of-food-at-a-time/

"Healing Factor – Superman is shown to possess remarkable recuperative powers that allow him to quickly heal from wounds and makes him immune to all forms of human or Earthly diseases, illnesses, viruses and toxins."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_and_abilities_of_Superman


" Healing factor: Superman could regenerate physical damage to his body at an accelerated rate. He was able to regenerate when Wonder Woman slit his throat with her tiara in Wonder Woman #219. In the series Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, Superman regenerates his body after being reduced to near a skeleton by a special nuke that was designed to blot out sun light and disrupt energy. Superman's healing rate has been inconsistently portrayed, however. In the first issue of the "Superman/Batman" comic, Alfred is able to remove a Kryptonite bullet from Superman's body without fear of the wound closing (probably because the Kryptonite was affecting his ability to heal). "
http://superman.wikia.com/wiki/Superman%27s_Powers_and_Abilities

I'm sorry, what were you saying?
Something about getting your facts straight?

>> ^meggymoo:

Here's a fun fact. The slow loris is the worlds only venomous primate. They also stink.


That's debatable since they secrete the toxin from their elbows. "Venomous" implies that the toxin is injected directly with a bite, sting, spur, etc.

>> ^kceaton1:

>> ^skinnydaddy1:
FAA is going to freak if they find this video and incident has not been reported. o.0

I'm right there with you, that may in fact be one hell of a major no-no and I hope they were over empty lands.
I wonder under normal regulations if they are actually even supposed to continue operating in an event like that, considering all the regulations put on flying (there are a lot). I know it looks like some guy's dumpy car just lost a side door, no biggy, but in flying they breath fire down your neck for missing certain bolts or those said bolts even being remotely loose... I'll have to look and see if a pilot can make a judgment call concerning no mandatory operation machinery attached to the craft coming off (that may be part of the main fuselage!)
I did look and see that the national statistic on flights that should have remained grounded getting fixed (some problems not so big, some big enough that when the plane landed emergency crews were needed to put out fires, not including MANY of the emergency landings at the wrong airport before the plane truly does CRASH) that number comes in at around 65000 flights over six years... This is from the FAA, so we're talking about mostly small business's up to large airlines like Delta. BUT, it must always be remembered that they do a better job than your average driver and their car by far; they just have much more "flashier" endings I guess you could say. Which makes the media frenzy about it like a feeding pool that CNN & FOX News ALIKE, engorge until nothing is left but the tasteless morsels that just reiterate everything we have been told by them before this...it is unfortunate that not only we are exposed to this media circus, but also that 'flying' is being dragged through the toxin-filled-sludge created by our media-hype-elite...
I'd figure the ONE group of people that might actually take great care of their machinery is the smaller business and solo-flyer's. I know one of my grandfather's brother spent hours on end with his plane making sure it was in tip-top shape and making sure his flight plans were exacting (he was kinda a bush-pilot, so that was important to him, if you know what I mean). A small off-topic element to this: I remember going through his flight plans and maps that went up through the Western U.S., into Western Canada, then into lower Alaska...it was amazing to see what detail he went into to get the job done; I would feel very safe flying with him if I ever did, because of the extreme measures he went to to get everything right...
I wonder if the pilot had to worry about anything when they landed, it's impossible to see from the clip, but you don't see if it goes up at all and hits the plane--but, I'd assume since everyone is acting basically happy and fine (no panic at all) I assume that the rest of that flight went normally, except for that and the large amounts of paperwork that wold follow it... (Assuming they weren't idiotic and DID report it...)


Found a little blurp about it here.

Quote
Nah it wasn't our fault. There were ten 'other' jumpers before us. Some were new and didn't know how to operate it. On takeoff they failed to close it properly and then in the back from held it down with there feet till 2500 where two of them stood up to close it properly. When they stood on it it was pushed below the stops on either side (the angle iron shaped things) and then turned the handle. I am assuming the locking pin went below the frame of the door. At height they stood to open the door - stepping on the door and turning the handle. The door didn't rise. They then stood on it harder with no change to the result. They then stood on it harder and pushed it down into the wind and it caught air and took off. One of the coolest things I have ever seen. The door landed in the quarry and has been recovered - it needs about $100 in repairs and will be back in action this weekend (or so i have been told).

Was looking for more on it but so far zip.

>> ^skinnydaddy1:

FAA is going to freak if they find this video and incident has not been reported. o.0


I'm right there with you, that may in fact be one hell of a major no-no and I hope they were over empty lands.

I wonder under normal regulations if they are actually even supposed to continue operating in an event like that, considering all the regulations put on flying (there are a lot). I know it looks like some guy's dumpy car just lost a side door, no biggy, but in flying they breath fire down your neck for missing certain bolts or those said bolts even being remotely loose... I'll have to look and see if a pilot can make a judgment call concerning no mandatory operation machinery attached to the craft coming off (that may be part of the main fuselage!)

I did look and see that the national statistic on flights that should have remained grounded getting fixed (some problems not so big, some big enough that when the plane landed emergency crews were needed to put out fires, not including MANY of the emergency landings at the wrong airport before the plane truly does CRASH) that number comes in at around 65000 flights over six years... This is from the FAA, so we're talking about mostly small business's up to large airlines like Delta. BUT, it must always be remembered that they do a better job than your average driver and their car by far; they just have much more "flashier" endings I guess you could say. Which makes the media frenzy about it like a feeding pool that CNN & FOX News ALIKE, engorge until nothing is left but the tasteless morsels that just reiterate everything we have been told by them before this...it is unfortunate that not only we are exposed to this media circus, but also that 'flying' is being dragged through the toxin-filled-sludge created by our media-hype-elite...

I'd figure the ONE group of people that might actually take great care of their machinery is the smaller business and solo-flyer's. I know one of my grandfather's brother spent hours on end with his plane making sure it was in tip-top shape and making sure his flight plans were exacting (he was kinda a bush-pilot, so that was important to him, if you know what I mean). A small off-topic element to this: I remember going through his flight plans and maps that went up through the Western U.S., into Western Canada, then into lower Alaska...it was amazing to see what detail he went into to get the job done; I would feel very safe flying with him if I ever did, because of the extreme measures he went to to get everything right...

I wonder if the pilot had to worry about anything when they landed, it's impossible to see from the clip, but you don't see if it goes up at all and hits the plane--but, I'd assume since everyone is acting basically happy and fine (no panic at all) I assume that the rest of that flight went normally, except for that and the large amounts of paperwork that wold follow it... (Assuming they weren't idiotic and DID report it...)

@dag
I'd rather be doing more to capture the mercury, sulfur and other toxins coming out of the smoke stacks. Better still, I'd rather turn them off and turn on a series of nuclear plants in their stead and go to zero emission power.

@NetRunner,

The difference is I stated that we don't have a high confidence in projections of temperature change due to increased CO2 when all other factors are taken into account. The research done either ignores all other factors but CO2, or lacks a high confidence level, in no small part owing to a lack of quality long term data and understanding of H2O's role.

Translating that to what should we do means we don't have a good idea how much lowering CO2 emissions will help, what we do know is it will be expensive to do it on a large scale today. Hence my recommendation is battery powered cars and nuclear delivered electricity, as those are things we really should be doing anyways. We should additionally be spending money adapting to a warmer world, again because I believe if you are already living within a foot of being below sea level adaptations are already long overdue.

I suppose I could be biased, I grew up on a grain farm in Canada and so we only stand to profit in a warming world, but I'd like to think I value the plight of the whole of humanity more highly.

Trust me @spoco2, I read plenty of sources. And I judge the content accordingly. I don't make the mistake of confirmation bias like some people.

The "Thiomersal-free" vaccines still contain other mercury compounds. It's like the government trying to call GMOs organic.

And they are still using Thiomersal in flu shots. So it's not a non-issue, doesn't matter anyway--you're a government tool. As long as the government says it's safe, you'll gladly stick yourself intravenously with a toxin that attacks your brain. Hey, you weren't using it anyway right?

Fructose is linked to heart disease, glucose is not.

This is due to the two different types of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) formed in the blood as the body metabolizes sugars. LDL formed by metabolizing glucose is large and buoyant, thus floating harmlessly through the blood. LDL formed by metabolizing fructose is smaller and denser, and more likely to get caught in the walls of the arteries, causing plaque buildup and leads to heart disease.

The only proper treatment for fructose intake is oddly the one thing abundant in all natural sources of the toxin: fibre.

http://videosift.com/video/Sugar-The-Bitter-Truth

"I'm not comfortable with revealing my source for the Botulinum toxin... lets just say that Simon Cowell is my neighbor, and he swims in a pool of the stuff nightly."