In terms of moral and ethical boundaries Mike Adams is well known for crossing the line often with his promotion of dangerous pseudoscience and disgusting conspiracy theories, as well as calling anyone that promotes real science, debunks his claims, or criticizes him a shill. He also says some other pretty horrible things about his critics (most of the time this is ignored because none of his critics really cares what he says about them, they're just more concerned over what he promotes and how he influences people), and in the case of Jon Entine, threatens to sue them.
A few days ago he crossed another line, and this one may just get him thrown in prison.
On his main website, Natural News, Adams wrote an article that can be best described as endorsing and encouraging the murder of anyone that supports Monsanto and the biotech industry in general (read his article here).
To quote his article:
"Monsanto collaborators who have signed on to accelerate heinous crimes being committed against humanity under the false promise of 'feeding the world' with toxic GMOs."
and...
"that it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity."
That pretty much says it all. He is saying that people that support GMO foods and the biotech industry should be killed, and that it is justifiable to do so.
He later went on to say that:
"For the record, in no way do I condone vigilante violence against anyone, and I believe every condemned criminal deserves a fair trial and a punishment that fits the crime. Do not misinterpret this article as any sort of call for violence, as I wholly disavow any such actions. I am a person who demands due process under the law for all those accused of crimes."
Yet those two lines, plus the title, Biotech genocide, Monsanto collaborators and the Nazi legacy of ‘science’ as justification for murder, clearly shows he means otherwise.
He then "endorsed" a website call Monsanto Collaborators which has a list of people that are claimed to be "collaborators" with Monsanto. Not surprising the people on this list are critics of his.
A day later in a poor attempt to do damage control (and perhaps avoid law enforcement investigating him) he went on to denounce Monsanto Collaborators, and not unexpectedly claimed it was a "shill" website meant to defame the anti-GMO movement. This denouncement looked not only very suspicious, but also makes one wonder why he would endorse such a website in the first place.
This denouncement means nothing, mostly because of his endorsement of killing GMO supporters, but also because evidence has pointed towards him as being the person in-charge of that website (read here and here) or at the very least being involved with it. This should be pretty obvious too considering the fact that everyone mention on the "collaborators" list are, as I said before, huge critics of his.
Mike Adams has been receiving a lot of criticism over the past couple of month, starting with his obvious attempt to intimidate Jon Entine to get him to retract an article that criticized him by threatening to sue Entine, as well as him intimidating Forbes to take down said article (you can still read the article here) to criticism of his appearance on Dr. Oz, to other random everyday criticisms of him.
Despite this criticism of him, all of which has been brought onto him by his own behavior as well as endorsement of dangerous pseudoscience and promotion of conspiracy theories, he has no right to make threats like this. Doing this will get you in trouble with law enforcement, and it does appear he is being investigated by the FBI.
The best way to counter criticism is by making good arguments with logic and evidence. Mike Adams does none of that. He just makes wild accusations and calls anyone that criticizes him a shill.
Update: Mike Adams has done some "cleaning up" of his original article by deleting certain parts that could be considered death threats. How ever, the original article can still be read here.
Special thanks to This Week in Pseudoscience for the link.
Monsanto Collaborators is also down due to "Bandwidth allocation exceeded", but you can still see the site here.
You can also read more about this situation here at Genetic Literacy Project.
Showing posts with label Monsanto. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Monsanto. Show all posts
Saturday, July 26, 2014
Friday, March 7, 2014
How perception is used for deception in promoting pseudoscience and conspiracy theories
Perception is one of the most commonly used tools of advertisers. If done correctly it can be used to sell a person a product or an idea, even if it's something they do not want or need. All you need is an image combined with some information (factual or not) that catches a person's eye and makes them interested in whatever is being sold which ultimately leads them to buying whatever it is that is being sold.
Promoters of pseudoscience and conspiracy theories know this as well, and will often times create pictures on the internet of images coupled with text in an attempt to get you to "buy" whatever claims that they are making.
Here's an example of what I'm talking about:
Looks nice, doesn't it? The pretty, smiling young woman that catches your eye and causes you to read whatever it is that the picture says and perhaps even gets you to try or believe whatever it is that the text is saying, which in this case is an advertisement to get people to try out Earthing.
This is an example of using positive images inorder to fool people into believing that something that isn't true. In this case it the original creator wants you to believe that Earthing works.
Now lets take a look at this next picture, courtesy of Illuminutti.com:
Not as nice looking as the previous picture, is it?
Except for the photo in the bottom left side of the page, everything else about this picture is exactly the same as the one above this one.
Most people probably would not have bothered to read the text on the second picture due to the shear fact that they would be to disgusted by the photo to bother read the text. Even if a person did read the text they probably wouldn't try Earthing in the first place out of shear fear of ending up like that guy.
This is ofcourse why the creators of the first photo wouldn't use such a photo. They know that such a photo would probably make a person sick to their stomach and not even bother to read the text, more or less be even interested in Earthing.
Ofcourse while positive images work very well in promoting pseudoscience and conspiracy theories, negative images can often have the same impact, if not more so than positive images if it's done right:
Now for many people if they saw something like that and then read the text they would probably never eat any GMO foods again, and they probably wouldn't bother to do any research into the claims either. They would just see the image and be to scared to actually investigate what the text is saying, which is probably what the creators of that picture intended it to cause people do.
The fact is that anytime you see stuff like this on the internet you should always question the claims being made, and always assume that whomever made it is trying to screw with your perception inorder to deceive you and get you to to believe them without questioning their claims.
Sunday, January 12, 2014
I am Anti-Organic Foods
Anyone whom has read this blog is probably aware that I don't like the Anti-GMO movement. I find the movement to be highly deceptive and uses propaganda and fear mongering in order to get people to buy "organic" food, and to reject all GMO foods no matter what.
Normally in spite their BS I would still have bought and eaten organic foods, not because I believed it was healthier for you (although I admit I at one time I did believe that) but because it tasted a little better, but now knowing more facts about the Anti-GMO movement and the extremes that they have gone to, and about organic food and it's sustainability, as well as the organic food industry itself, I can no longer consciously buy and/or eat organic foods. To put it bluntly I am now Anti-Organic Foods, and I have several reasons (besides what I just what said here) why.
My first and foremost reasons for why I am now Anti-Organic Foods is because of the Anti-GMO movement itself and what it's highly deceptive propaganda and fear mongering has done, which is to cause governments around the world to pass completely moronic Anti-GMO laws that is based off of fear rather than legitimate science, and has at times because of these laws hampered research into GMO foods, and to cause normally intelligent to reject GMO foods without any reason other than what lies the Anti-GMO movement has told them.
Another reason why I am now Anti-Organic Foods is because of the deaths that have been caused by the Anti-GMO movement and their propaganda, particularly in developing in certain developing countries where the leaders of those countries actually rejected food donations because they were lead to believe (most notably by Greenpeace) that the food may have contain GMO foods and was (according to these Anti-GMO groups) poisonous. This type of deception has resulted in thousands of deaths, and possibly more.
My third reason why I have rejected organic foods is because of the physical destruction caused by the Anti-GMO movement, particularly of experimental GMO food crops due to the perception that these crops were dangerous. This destruction has caused millions of dollars worth of damage, not to mention the lose of valuable research data. The fact that many Anti-GMO groups (including Greenpeace) often praise this destruction, and have been accused of directly or indirectly responsible of being the cause of such destruction only makes the whole Anti-GMO movement look so much worse to me.
Now my fourth reason for rejecting organic foods isn't because of the Anti-GMO movement, but because of organic foods itself.
Organic foods are luxury foods. That's all they are. They are not any healthier or better for you, they just taste better. They won't solve the world's food supply problems, and infact will make them worse due to organic foods having lower crop yields than GMO crops, and also not being able to be grown in as many places as GMO crops can.
Organic crops are also not as environmentally friendly as they're made out to be and require far more land to grow on than GMO crops do, and require far more pesticides inorder to keep insects away than GMO crops (and despite what you have been told a lot of farmers that grow organic foods actually do use pesticides, and lots of it).
My fifth reason for rejecting organic foods is because of the organic food industry itself, particularly with the self created perception that the organic food industry is a small and humble force. It is not.
Some of the farmers in the organic food industry might be small and humble, but the industry as a whole is a huge, multi-billion dollar industry (Whole Foods Market, one of the largest organic foods supermarkets, made over nine billion in 2010) so in my opinion it's very deceptive how the whole organic food industry has made itself out to be.
My final reason why I have rejected organic foods is because of the self imposed perception that organic foods are ethical.
In my opinion organic foods are not ethical. It's perceived ethicalness is based off of lies created by a group do-gooder no-nothings who believe that because something that is created by a multi-billion dollar corporation then it must be evil and dangerous. This type of belief has lead to both the creation of the most outrageous lies and have been the cause of many deaths, all inorder to force people to eat luxury foods.
Because of all this I have decided to avoid eating organic foods when and where I can. I just don't feel right eating something that is based off of lies.
Normally in spite their BS I would still have bought and eaten organic foods, not because I believed it was healthier for you (although I admit I at one time I did believe that) but because it tasted a little better, but now knowing more facts about the Anti-GMO movement and the extremes that they have gone to, and about organic food and it's sustainability, as well as the organic food industry itself, I can no longer consciously buy and/or eat organic foods. To put it bluntly I am now Anti-Organic Foods, and I have several reasons (besides what I just what said here) why.
My first and foremost reasons for why I am now Anti-Organic Foods is because of the Anti-GMO movement itself and what it's highly deceptive propaganda and fear mongering has done, which is to cause governments around the world to pass completely moronic Anti-GMO laws that is based off of fear rather than legitimate science, and has at times because of these laws hampered research into GMO foods, and to cause normally intelligent to reject GMO foods without any reason other than what lies the Anti-GMO movement has told them.
Another reason why I am now Anti-Organic Foods is because of the deaths that have been caused by the Anti-GMO movement and their propaganda, particularly in developing in certain developing countries where the leaders of those countries actually rejected food donations because they were lead to believe (most notably by Greenpeace) that the food may have contain GMO foods and was (according to these Anti-GMO groups) poisonous. This type of deception has resulted in thousands of deaths, and possibly more.
My third reason why I have rejected organic foods is because of the physical destruction caused by the Anti-GMO movement, particularly of experimental GMO food crops due to the perception that these crops were dangerous. This destruction has caused millions of dollars worth of damage, not to mention the lose of valuable research data. The fact that many Anti-GMO groups (including Greenpeace) often praise this destruction, and have been accused of directly or indirectly responsible of being the cause of such destruction only makes the whole Anti-GMO movement look so much worse to me.
Now my fourth reason for rejecting organic foods isn't because of the Anti-GMO movement, but because of organic foods itself.
Organic foods are luxury foods. That's all they are. They are not any healthier or better for you, they just taste better. They won't solve the world's food supply problems, and infact will make them worse due to organic foods having lower crop yields than GMO crops, and also not being able to be grown in as many places as GMO crops can.
Organic crops are also not as environmentally friendly as they're made out to be and require far more land to grow on than GMO crops do, and require far more pesticides inorder to keep insects away than GMO crops (and despite what you have been told a lot of farmers that grow organic foods actually do use pesticides, and lots of it).
My fifth reason for rejecting organic foods is because of the organic food industry itself, particularly with the self created perception that the organic food industry is a small and humble force. It is not.
Some of the farmers in the organic food industry might be small and humble, but the industry as a whole is a huge, multi-billion dollar industry (Whole Foods Market, one of the largest organic foods supermarkets, made over nine billion in 2010) so in my opinion it's very deceptive how the whole organic food industry has made itself out to be.
My final reason why I have rejected organic foods is because of the self imposed perception that organic foods are ethical.
In my opinion organic foods are not ethical. It's perceived ethicalness is based off of lies created by a group do-gooder no-nothings who believe that because something that is created by a multi-billion dollar corporation then it must be evil and dangerous. This type of belief has lead to both the creation of the most outrageous lies and have been the cause of many deaths, all inorder to force people to eat luxury foods.
Because of all this I have decided to avoid eating organic foods when and where I can. I just don't feel right eating something that is based off of lies.
Wednesday, December 4, 2013
The 10 most bizarre, absurd, and dumb conspiracy theories of 2013
Throughout this year there were a lot of new conspiracy theories going around. Some of them were scary. Some of them were weird. And some of them were just bizarre, absurd, and dumb to the point where one would either have to laugh at them, or pull their hair out in frustration.
The following list are ten of what I feel are the strangest and most bizarre and/or absurd conspiracy theories of 2013:
10. Robert Sarvis was a Democratic plant to help Terry McAuliffe win the Virginia gubernatorial election.
(Author's note: being that I am from Virginia, I just felt that I had to mention this one)
In the 2013 Virginia gubernatorial election there were a lot of accusations that went back and forth (some true, some not) but one of the biggest accusation didn't come during the election, but afterwards. The accusation that I'm talking about is the one that claims that Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis was actually a shill or plant by the Democrats inorder to steal votes away from Republican candidate Ken Cuccinelli and to help guarantee victory for Terry McAuliffe.
Now as plausible as this may sound, there are just two problems with this: First there is no guarantee that the people who voted for Sarvis would have voted for Cuccinelli, and second most of the polls before the election showed that McAuliffe had an over 50% lead, and thus a spoiler candidate would not have been needed inorder to win. Also, besides those facts and the fact that there is no actual evidence that Sarvis was a Democratic plant, it's just as likely that Sarvis actually took away votes from McAuliffe as it is from Cuccinelli.
9. Anti-GMO/Monsanto claims.
While conspiracy theories against GMO foods are nothing new, what is new is that the Anti-GMO movement now seems to be focusing their claims on one company: Monsanto.
From what I can tell from their claims Monsanto pretty much controls the FDA, the farming industry, the food industry, Obama, the media, the U.S. Supreme Court, law enforcement, any blog that debunks the anti-GMO movement's claims, all the science organizations, and that Monsanto is responsible for every atrocity committed in the world since World War Two.
According to many in the anti-GMO movement Monsanto does all of this inorder to sell you a product that (insert the anti-GMO claim of your choice).
8. The Boston Marathon bombing was a false flag attack.
On April 15 one of the worst terrorist attacks in the U.S. since the 9/11 attacks occurred at one of the largest sporting events in the U.S., the Boston Marathon. Three people were killed, and 264 people were injured, many of who also lost limbs, or were otherwise permanently maimed in some way. Also, like clock work, conspiracy theories about the bombing started to be posted all over the internet within minutes of the attack.
The most common of the claims were that it was a false flag attack, and then later de-evolved into stranger conspiracy theories in that both the suspects, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, were under some kind of government mind control, right on down to the most absurd claim of there being no attack at all and that the whole thing was staged and that no one was actually hurt or killed.
Besides the fact that all of these claims were absurd on face value alone and were quickly debunked, they were also very disrespectful and just plain disgusting.
7. Amanda Bynes became a victim of Illuminati mind control.
Over the summer actress Amanda Bynes began engaging in behavior that ranged from bizarre to down right dangerous. This behavior of her's eventually lead to her being involuntarily committed into psychiatric care.
Now to most people this looks like a simple enough case of a young woman whom is mentally ill and whom's mental illness has caused her to act out in bizarre and dangerous ways. To a conspiracy theorist on the other hand it's a clear case of Illuminati mind control.
The main theory that is going around is that Amanda was being groomed by the Illuminati as part of a youth indoctrination program, and that she had decided to break away from them. When Amanda did allegedly break away from them one of two things happen: Either that the indoctrination was so intense that she could not function on her own and her mind snapped, or she was driven insane via remote mind control.
While this explanation kind of makes sense in a weird way, the one theory behind her behavior that makes even more sense is that she is either schizophrenic or bi-polar. Combined with her age, and her escalating erratic behavior over the past few years, this makes a lot more sense than a couple of conspiracy theories that range from being far fetched to pretty much impossible.
6. The Xbox One can see you naked.
When the Xbox One and all of it's feature were announced there were many concerns (some legit, some not) but one of the biggest concerns that in itself became a conspiracy theory is that the new gaming counsel (through it's inbuilt motion sensing Kinect system) can see you naked, even with your clothes on. The reason behind this claim is due to a photo of a test subject seen through the view of the Kinect that allegedly shows his ding-dong, despite the fact that he is wearing clothes.
As it turns out that wasn't the man's private parts, but was actually a fold in his pants that people mistook for his you-know-what. Although it should be noted that the Xbox One can see you naked... if you're actually playing a video game infront of it while naked (and if that's your thing then have fun playing with it... the Xbox One I mean).
5. Something about Comet ISON
The passing through and eventual destruction of Comet ISON was considered one of the biggest astronomical events of this year, not to mention the fact that we gained a ton of data on not just this comet itself, but comets alone through our observations of the comet, including it's destruction by the Sun.
Besides just destroying the comet, the Sun also (hopefully) destroyed something else that went along with the comet: Conspiracy theories.
From what I can find there were three primary conspiracy theories concerning the comet: That the comet was going to hit the Earth and that NASA was covering it up (clearly not true, and would be impossible to cover up) that it was an alien space (if it was I would think that it would have maneuvered itself into a non-destructive path, unless the aliens were suicidal) or that it was a sign of the Rapture (which clearly didn't happen).
Regardless of whatever conspiracy theorist claim was being made about Comet ISON, they all turned out to be wrong.
4. Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge wasn't actually pregnant.
This year Catherine, wife of Prince William and future Queen of England, gave birth to their first child, Prince George... or did she?
According to several conspiracy theorists the Duchess of Cambridge was not pregnant, and that the child was born from a surrogate mother chosen by the Illuminati (whether or not Prince William was the father depends on which conspiracy theorist you ask).
Now the reason why some conspiracy theorists were making this claim is also as absurd as the claim itself: she didn't really look pregnant, and in her first public appearance after the birth, she didn't look like she had just given birth...
3. Chemtrails are being used to poison angels in Heaven.
Probably one of the most absurd conspiracy theories that I read about this year was one that claimed that militant Atheists are using chemtrails to poison and kill angels. Sounds extremely absurd, right? Well, it is. Also sounds like satire too, don't it? Well, it is.
So right now you are probably asking "if it is satire, then why is it on this list?" Because a lot of conspiracy theorists didn't realize that it is satire and actually reposted the original article on their websites as if it were a real conspiracy theory, rather then something that some creative person just made up as a joke.
Come to think of it, that's how a lot of conspiracy theories are like (minus the joke part).
2. Gay people are deliberately spreading HIV with special rings.
This bizarre claim was made not by some random homophobic whack job with a blog or a Facebook page, but a famous homophobic whack job with his own nationally syndicated television program, Pat Robertson, and it was made on said television program.
Robertson's claims were that homosexuals wore special rings that were designed to cut people (usually via a hand shake) and that these rings had HIV on them, and that homosexuals used these rings to infect people (especially people they don't like).
These claims were extremely absurd. Infact they were so absurd (and embarrassing) that CBN removed them from their website and tried to get the videos of Robertson saying them removed from the internet (and utterly failed to do so), which shows two things: The people incharge of CBN do realize that certain bigoted remarks can go to far, and that people incharge of CBN do not know how the internet works.
1. President Obama and George Soros planned to nuke 300 million Americans.
According to Jim Garrow, a right wing activist whom now claims to be a former intelligence officer, claimed while on Erik Rush's radio show that President Obama was planning to drop nuclear bombs on the population and was going to kill around 300 million people. This "plot" was stop by three military officers whom he claims were fired because they stopped the President's "evil plot" (turns out they were relieved of duty due to behavior unbecoming of an officer).
The whole conspiracy theory in itself is absurd just on the those claims alone, but it goes even further into the land of bizarreness for the reason why President Obama was planning on doing this: to make George Soros richer via betting against the U.S. Dollar...
So there you have it folks, the ten of what I feel are the most bizarre, absurd, and dumb conspiracy theories of 2013. If you have any conspiracies theories that were created this year and feel they should have been on this list, please feel free to leave them in the comments section.
The following list are ten of what I feel are the strangest and most bizarre and/or absurd conspiracy theories of 2013:
10. Robert Sarvis was a Democratic plant to help Terry McAuliffe win the Virginia gubernatorial election.
(Author's note: being that I am from Virginia, I just felt that I had to mention this one)
In the 2013 Virginia gubernatorial election there were a lot of accusations that went back and forth (some true, some not) but one of the biggest accusation didn't come during the election, but afterwards. The accusation that I'm talking about is the one that claims that Libertarian candidate Robert Sarvis was actually a shill or plant by the Democrats inorder to steal votes away from Republican candidate Ken Cuccinelli and to help guarantee victory for Terry McAuliffe.
Now as plausible as this may sound, there are just two problems with this: First there is no guarantee that the people who voted for Sarvis would have voted for Cuccinelli, and second most of the polls before the election showed that McAuliffe had an over 50% lead, and thus a spoiler candidate would not have been needed inorder to win. Also, besides those facts and the fact that there is no actual evidence that Sarvis was a Democratic plant, it's just as likely that Sarvis actually took away votes from McAuliffe as it is from Cuccinelli.
9. Anti-GMO/Monsanto claims.
While conspiracy theories against GMO foods are nothing new, what is new is that the Anti-GMO movement now seems to be focusing their claims on one company: Monsanto.
From what I can tell from their claims Monsanto pretty much controls the FDA, the farming industry, the food industry, Obama, the media, the U.S. Supreme Court, law enforcement, any blog that debunks the anti-GMO movement's claims, all the science organizations, and that Monsanto is responsible for every atrocity committed in the world since World War Two.
According to many in the anti-GMO movement Monsanto does all of this inorder to sell you a product that (insert the anti-GMO claim of your choice).
8. The Boston Marathon bombing was a false flag attack.
On April 15 one of the worst terrorist attacks in the U.S. since the 9/11 attacks occurred at one of the largest sporting events in the U.S., the Boston Marathon. Three people were killed, and 264 people were injured, many of who also lost limbs, or were otherwise permanently maimed in some way. Also, like clock work, conspiracy theories about the bombing started to be posted all over the internet within minutes of the attack.
The most common of the claims were that it was a false flag attack, and then later de-evolved into stranger conspiracy theories in that both the suspects, Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, were under some kind of government mind control, right on down to the most absurd claim of there being no attack at all and that the whole thing was staged and that no one was actually hurt or killed.
Besides the fact that all of these claims were absurd on face value alone and were quickly debunked, they were also very disrespectful and just plain disgusting.
7. Amanda Bynes became a victim of Illuminati mind control.
Over the summer actress Amanda Bynes began engaging in behavior that ranged from bizarre to down right dangerous. This behavior of her's eventually lead to her being involuntarily committed into psychiatric care.
Now to most people this looks like a simple enough case of a young woman whom is mentally ill and whom's mental illness has caused her to act out in bizarre and dangerous ways. To a conspiracy theorist on the other hand it's a clear case of Illuminati mind control.
The main theory that is going around is that Amanda was being groomed by the Illuminati as part of a youth indoctrination program, and that she had decided to break away from them. When Amanda did allegedly break away from them one of two things happen: Either that the indoctrination was so intense that she could not function on her own and her mind snapped, or she was driven insane via remote mind control.
While this explanation kind of makes sense in a weird way, the one theory behind her behavior that makes even more sense is that she is either schizophrenic or bi-polar. Combined with her age, and her escalating erratic behavior over the past few years, this makes a lot more sense than a couple of conspiracy theories that range from being far fetched to pretty much impossible.
6. The Xbox One can see you naked.
When the Xbox One and all of it's feature were announced there were many concerns (some legit, some not) but one of the biggest concerns that in itself became a conspiracy theory is that the new gaming counsel (through it's inbuilt motion sensing Kinect system) can see you naked, even with your clothes on. The reason behind this claim is due to a photo of a test subject seen through the view of the Kinect that allegedly shows his ding-dong, despite the fact that he is wearing clothes.
As it turns out that wasn't the man's private parts, but was actually a fold in his pants that people mistook for his you-know-what. Although it should be noted that the Xbox One can see you naked... if you're actually playing a video game infront of it while naked (and if that's your thing then have fun playing with it... the Xbox One I mean).
5. Something about Comet ISON
The passing through and eventual destruction of Comet ISON was considered one of the biggest astronomical events of this year, not to mention the fact that we gained a ton of data on not just this comet itself, but comets alone through our observations of the comet, including it's destruction by the Sun.
Besides just destroying the comet, the Sun also (hopefully) destroyed something else that went along with the comet: Conspiracy theories.
From what I can find there were three primary conspiracy theories concerning the comet: That the comet was going to hit the Earth and that NASA was covering it up (clearly not true, and would be impossible to cover up) that it was an alien space (if it was I would think that it would have maneuvered itself into a non-destructive path, unless the aliens were suicidal) or that it was a sign of the Rapture (which clearly didn't happen).
Regardless of whatever conspiracy theorist claim was being made about Comet ISON, they all turned out to be wrong.
4. Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge wasn't actually pregnant.
This year Catherine, wife of Prince William and future Queen of England, gave birth to their first child, Prince George... or did she?
According to several conspiracy theorists the Duchess of Cambridge was not pregnant, and that the child was born from a surrogate mother chosen by the Illuminati (whether or not Prince William was the father depends on which conspiracy theorist you ask).
Now the reason why some conspiracy theorists were making this claim is also as absurd as the claim itself: she didn't really look pregnant, and in her first public appearance after the birth, she didn't look like she had just given birth...
3. Chemtrails are being used to poison angels in Heaven.
Probably one of the most absurd conspiracy theories that I read about this year was one that claimed that militant Atheists are using chemtrails to poison and kill angels. Sounds extremely absurd, right? Well, it is. Also sounds like satire too, don't it? Well, it is.
So right now you are probably asking "if it is satire, then why is it on this list?" Because a lot of conspiracy theorists didn't realize that it is satire and actually reposted the original article on their websites as if it were a real conspiracy theory, rather then something that some creative person just made up as a joke.
Come to think of it, that's how a lot of conspiracy theories are like (minus the joke part).
2. Gay people are deliberately spreading HIV with special rings.
This bizarre claim was made not by some random homophobic whack job with a blog or a Facebook page, but a famous homophobic whack job with his own nationally syndicated television program, Pat Robertson, and it was made on said television program.
Robertson's claims were that homosexuals wore special rings that were designed to cut people (usually via a hand shake) and that these rings had HIV on them, and that homosexuals used these rings to infect people (especially people they don't like).
These claims were extremely absurd. Infact they were so absurd (and embarrassing) that CBN removed them from their website and tried to get the videos of Robertson saying them removed from the internet (and utterly failed to do so), which shows two things: The people incharge of CBN do realize that certain bigoted remarks can go to far, and that people incharge of CBN do not know how the internet works.
1. President Obama and George Soros planned to nuke 300 million Americans.
According to Jim Garrow, a right wing activist whom now claims to be a former intelligence officer, claimed while on Erik Rush's radio show that President Obama was planning to drop nuclear bombs on the population and was going to kill around 300 million people. This "plot" was stop by three military officers whom he claims were fired because they stopped the President's "evil plot" (turns out they were relieved of duty due to behavior unbecoming of an officer).
The whole conspiracy theory in itself is absurd just on the those claims alone, but it goes even further into the land of bizarreness for the reason why President Obama was planning on doing this: to make George Soros richer via betting against the U.S. Dollar...
So there you have it folks, the ten of what I feel are the most bizarre, absurd, and dumb conspiracy theories of 2013. If you have any conspiracies theories that were created this year and feel they should have been on this list, please feel free to leave them in the comments section.
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Debunking the Anti-Monsanto/Anti-GMO claims
On May 25, a local group held a protest near where I live to protest Monsanto and GMO foods.
The protest itself, while larger than what I actually expected, wasn't as large as what it could have been, with maybe only about 50 to 60 people attending.
Now about a week before this protest occurred someone was going the area and putting up some posters on lamp post and electric post not only advertising the protest, but also making several claims against both Monsanto and GMO foods.
I've looked into these claims that were made, and this is what I have found:
1. Monsanto fights labeling laws.
This is true [read here] but only to a certain extent, and there are a lot of other companies and groups (including scientists) that oppose these laws because many of them consider them to be unfair, and/or leaves to many loop holes, and many opponents also claim that these laws are really attempts to out right ban GMO foods.
Also, when the people of California were given a chance to vote into law Proposition 37, which would have required labeling of GMO foods, the voters rejected it, so really you can't actually blame Monsanto about that, because when given the chance, the people rejected such laws.
2. Monsanto's propriety and legal actions harm small farmers.
Monsanto has, since the mid-1990's, filled 145 suits against individual US farmers for patent infringement and/or breach of contract in connection with its genetically engineered seed, and while this may sound like a lot, this is actually a very small number in comparison to thousands of individual, independent farmers in the US.
Also, only 11 of these suits actually went to trial, all of which Monsanto won.
3. Scientists' studies show severe damage to GMO-feed animals.
There was a study in 2012 by Gilles-Eric Seralini that claimed to show that rats feed GMO corn increased cancer rates in these rats compared to rats that were not feed GMO corn. This study has been highly criticized for certain unscientific methods (such as the failure to record the amounts of food the rats were feed and their growth rates) and has pretty much been debunked. [read here, here, and here]
4. Monsanto's Agent Orange and DDT contaminate food crops and villagers abroad.
Agent Orange was only used between 1965 to 1970 by the US military in Vietnam (before then they used a herbicide called Agent Blue). Even though this was true, you really can't blame Monsanto because they are not the ones who actually used it. It was various governments around the world who used it. Monsanto (along with Dow Chemical) just made the stuff.
As for DDT, most countries have been banning the stuff since the 1960's for agricultural use, and again, Monsanto is not the only company that made DDT, and it doesn't even make it anymore because of the 1972 US ban.
5. Monsanto falsely advertised it's Roundup as "biodegradable."
In 2007 Monsanto was convicted in France for false advertisement of it's product Roundup as being biodegradable. France is of course the only country that has done this, and some people might even claim that this is the result of France's environmental laws, rather than reality as Glyphosate (the technical name for Roundup) does not bioaccumulate and breaks down rapidly in the environment.
Whether Roundup should be considered biodegradable or not seems to be more of a matter of opinion then fact.
6. Monsanto blocks regulations. It's CEOs are in a revolving door from Monsanto to FDA (ex: Micheal Taylor, current Food Safety Czar).
This is completely false. Micheal Taylor (whomever he is) was never the Food Safety Czar. There has only been one Food Safety Czar, and that was Dr. David Acheson, and he only had that position from 2007 to 2008.
Monsanto can not actually block regulations, all it can do is lobby against laws and regulations that could affect it's business, and there is no "revolving door", so to speak, between Monsanto and the FDA.
7. Consumers rejected Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone in milk.
The rejection of BGH in milk is a matter of consumer opinion, and has nothing to do with facts.
8. 400 scientists and 58 countries conclude that organic farming trumps GMO for sustainable, environmental, and healthy agriculture. GM crops do not offer increased yields.
While studies have shown that organic farming, if done correctly, can be sustainable and environmentally friendly. If done incorrectly however the impact on the environment will actually be negative, and organic farming still requires more land than conventional farming.
Also, a crop's yield has nothing to do with whether or not it's a GMO, and has everything to do with the farming techniques used, and studies have shown that organic farming yields are actually less than those of conventional farming yields [read here].
9. Monsanto's control of the soy market results in 90% of soy market being GMO.
If Monsanto actually had control of the soy market then 100% of all soy beans would be GMO, not 90% as being claimed. Plus if farmers did not want to use Monsanto's soy bean seeds, then they don't have to, as there are other companies that sell soy bean seeds.
10. Allergies skyrocketed as GMO soy entered the system.
While food allergies have increased, and soy allergies are one of the more common food allergies, there is no scientific evidence that links GMO crops with the increase in food allergies.
11. Massive aerial spraying of Roundup in Colombia is being used by the U.S. and the Colombian government as a counter-insurgency tactic, contaminating food crops and poisoning villagers.
There has been large aerial spraying of Roundup in Colombia by the Colombian government (although there is no evidence that the U.S. actually is doing this to, and only gives support and training), the main purpose of which is to destroy coca plants (the plant which cocaine is extracted from).
While this has come under scrutiny for damaging legal crops and adverse health effects, the main criticism about the program (called Plan Colombia) has been about the cost and effectiveness.
Despite the fact that Roundup is used in this campaign, it doesn't mean that Monsanto is to blame for any damage done, as they are not the ones' spraying Roundup on these places.
The protest itself, while larger than what I actually expected, wasn't as large as what it could have been, with maybe only about 50 to 60 people attending.
Now about a week before this protest occurred someone was going the area and putting up some posters on lamp post and electric post not only advertising the protest, but also making several claims against both Monsanto and GMO foods.
I've looked into these claims that were made, and this is what I have found:
1. Monsanto fights labeling laws.
This is true [read here] but only to a certain extent, and there are a lot of other companies and groups (including scientists) that oppose these laws because many of them consider them to be unfair, and/or leaves to many loop holes, and many opponents also claim that these laws are really attempts to out right ban GMO foods.
Also, when the people of California were given a chance to vote into law Proposition 37, which would have required labeling of GMO foods, the voters rejected it, so really you can't actually blame Monsanto about that, because when given the chance, the people rejected such laws.
2. Monsanto's propriety and legal actions harm small farmers.
Monsanto has, since the mid-1990's, filled 145 suits against individual US farmers for patent infringement and/or breach of contract in connection with its genetically engineered seed, and while this may sound like a lot, this is actually a very small number in comparison to thousands of individual, independent farmers in the US.
Also, only 11 of these suits actually went to trial, all of which Monsanto won.
3. Scientists' studies show severe damage to GMO-feed animals.
There was a study in 2012 by Gilles-Eric Seralini that claimed to show that rats feed GMO corn increased cancer rates in these rats compared to rats that were not feed GMO corn. This study has been highly criticized for certain unscientific methods (such as the failure to record the amounts of food the rats were feed and their growth rates) and has pretty much been debunked. [read here, here, and here]
4. Monsanto's Agent Orange and DDT contaminate food crops and villagers abroad.
Agent Orange was only used between 1965 to 1970 by the US military in Vietnam (before then they used a herbicide called Agent Blue). Even though this was true, you really can't blame Monsanto because they are not the ones who actually used it. It was various governments around the world who used it. Monsanto (along with Dow Chemical) just made the stuff.
As for DDT, most countries have been banning the stuff since the 1960's for agricultural use, and again, Monsanto is not the only company that made DDT, and it doesn't even make it anymore because of the 1972 US ban.
5. Monsanto falsely advertised it's Roundup as "biodegradable."
In 2007 Monsanto was convicted in France for false advertisement of it's product Roundup as being biodegradable. France is of course the only country that has done this, and some people might even claim that this is the result of France's environmental laws, rather than reality as Glyphosate (the technical name for Roundup) does not bioaccumulate and breaks down rapidly in the environment.
Whether Roundup should be considered biodegradable or not seems to be more of a matter of opinion then fact.
6. Monsanto blocks regulations. It's CEOs are in a revolving door from Monsanto to FDA (ex: Micheal Taylor, current Food Safety Czar).
This is completely false. Micheal Taylor (whomever he is) was never the Food Safety Czar. There has only been one Food Safety Czar, and that was Dr. David Acheson, and he only had that position from 2007 to 2008.
Monsanto can not actually block regulations, all it can do is lobby against laws and regulations that could affect it's business, and there is no "revolving door", so to speak, between Monsanto and the FDA.
7. Consumers rejected Monsanto's Bovine Growth Hormone in milk.
The rejection of BGH in milk is a matter of consumer opinion, and has nothing to do with facts.
8. 400 scientists and 58 countries conclude that organic farming trumps GMO for sustainable, environmental, and healthy agriculture. GM crops do not offer increased yields.
While studies have shown that organic farming, if done correctly, can be sustainable and environmentally friendly. If done incorrectly however the impact on the environment will actually be negative, and organic farming still requires more land than conventional farming.
Also, a crop's yield has nothing to do with whether or not it's a GMO, and has everything to do with the farming techniques used, and studies have shown that organic farming yields are actually less than those of conventional farming yields [read here].
9. Monsanto's control of the soy market results in 90% of soy market being GMO.
If Monsanto actually had control of the soy market then 100% of all soy beans would be GMO, not 90% as being claimed. Plus if farmers did not want to use Monsanto's soy bean seeds, then they don't have to, as there are other companies that sell soy bean seeds.
10. Allergies skyrocketed as GMO soy entered the system.
While food allergies have increased, and soy allergies are one of the more common food allergies, there is no scientific evidence that links GMO crops with the increase in food allergies.
11. Massive aerial spraying of Roundup in Colombia is being used by the U.S. and the Colombian government as a counter-insurgency tactic, contaminating food crops and poisoning villagers.
There has been large aerial spraying of Roundup in Colombia by the Colombian government (although there is no evidence that the U.S. actually is doing this to, and only gives support and training), the main purpose of which is to destroy coca plants (the plant which cocaine is extracted from).
While this has come under scrutiny for damaging legal crops and adverse health effects, the main criticism about the program (called Plan Colombia) has been about the cost and effectiveness.
Despite the fact that Roundup is used in this campaign, it doesn't mean that Monsanto is to blame for any damage done, as they are not the ones' spraying Roundup on these places.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)