I have to agree with HR on his points. Remember our talks about speculation?
I could post links to scientists who have serious problems with gm foods and back these up with research. His post is a bunch of hallucinations about where the critics are coming from. This is ad hom, against forum rules and rather poor argument. If he had started with his link and responded to people's points, that would be a respectful and useful post. What he did was lazy and rude. It had no points. It had an on topic link. The topic is gm foods not amateur psychology or groups against fluoridation. You can start a thread on these other topics if you both like.
That's exactly what most of the people in the groups he mentioned are doing.
So I assume you did not understand my reference to those countries in relation to fluoridation. Those countries no longer fluoridate. Despite their high levels of science and technology, and atheism, and the fact that they stress rationality way above the mean for countries worldwide, their concerns must be similar to people thinking when roosters crow someone is going to die.
They take wee bit of information and go nuts with it by extrapolating it out to reach some ridiculous conclusion.
That's a hypothesis about people responding to other issues. It would be like if I made a list of groups that listened to governments and corporations and were naive for doing this and said you and Hercules were like them. As an ex college professor, let me tell you that is poor argument and several fallacies efficiently run together.
It's actually no different at all from how silly superstitions get started. Someone, somewhere happens to notice a coincidence of two things - that may have NO relationship at all with each other - and then he tells his brother who tells his neighbor.... And pretty soon lots of people start seeing the same thing (even if they really don't, they think they do).
More hypotheses that may or may not have any relevence to any of the posters in this thread.
Just like Friday the 13th. If you consider it bad luck, you can certainly always find bad things that happen on that day. But are they statistically more than any average day, say over ten years? Of course not.
I think it is sad that I must label this a straw man argument for you.
People are forever making idiotic connections. ("I heard a rooster crow after dark - that means someone is about to die.")
My you do go on.
And then there are those (I take it that you are one of this particular group) who are highly suspicious of any big business and all governments. Who think that business/governments are secretly experimenting on us and doing all kinds of evil things to us behind our backs. That's called paranoia - a malfunctioning of the brain - and isn't completely sane. (Of course, there are many different levels of it and yours seems very, very mild. But that just isn't true of the whole group - and it's a *huge* group, too.)
With all due respect, Fuck you.
Here some links to 2 groups of scientists whose arguments I have found convincing enough to think that the rapid spread of gm was not remotely in line with the precautionary principle....
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/MRC-pr.php
http://www.rense.com/general86/doct.htm
I picked two links quickly, but there are many scientists with concerns about GM foods with reference to research. I base my concerns on on scientific research coupled with knowledge about how profit can, note 'can', drive companies to act and also to create, control and manipulate research. You can PM Hercules all you want and speculate about the mental states of people you disagree with, but here, well, you should both know better.
There are many scientists around the world who are very concerned with GM foods. Further, as I pointed out earlier, the regulatory bodies in the US and industry are way too deeply connected, especially after Bush 2.
Your hallucinations about my mental state are 1) not grounded in reality and 2) inappropriate in these posts.
Further in the Swine Flu thread I backed up my assertions with a great deal of links to respectable organizations and newspapers. You on the other hand have done nothing so far to back up your assertions there about people who have concerns about certain kinds of conspiracies. You referred to all of them having neurological disorders and you also agreed with very illogical arguments of a poster whose beliefs you share there.
Instead of being condescending and making off topic ad hom posts why don't you demonstrate rationality and respectful dialogue instead of presuming you and those you agree with are the ones capable of it.
I mean really.
In fact, you've made enough of a habit of it, I will use the handy ignore button in relation to you. All the best. Bye.