|
There are a set of good policy objections to GMO usage, mostly at the ecological level- invasive species, genetic monoculture, etc. These aren't the ones lay anti-GMO people ever raise. If someone attacks GMOs in terms of their health effect on consumers, they're part of the bonkers brigade.
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
An actress I've worked with defriended me around the election last year because I kept responding to her ridiculous and easily-refuted political posts. We had a reunion for the theatre last week and she talked to me for a bit and essentially told me, "It's my Facebook wall and I post what I want, and I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong on there." She re-added me on Facebook, and she's posting all the same crap again. Impeach Obama, fake birth certificate, etc. I guess I'll just unfollow her and leave her alone to be politcally bitter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:29
|
|
|
Sulphuric Sundae's friend posted:"I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong." This seems to be one of the main points of being a conservative.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
Just double down on being wrong and mention black helicopters, UN Agenda 21, and that Obama is going to have a 3rd term. On a more personal note, I talked to my dad a bit more about Thanksgiving down in Florida... My mom's sister was asserting the Obama 3rd term poo poo. Last time I saw her, she was saying how nuclear power isn't the future and that clean coal is... My dad's an electrical engineer in power distribution... And I kinda followed in his footsteps. I feel better everyday about not traveling 9 hours in a car one way for Thanksgiving and watching a Smash Bros documentary instead. My dad doesn't know that much about video games and I think he would have had a better time watching it with me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
It's been a while since I got an actual crazy forwarded brochure, but one of my coworkers sprang this one on me and told me to look at it and tell him what I think. http://www.scribd.com/doc/192098996/Was-Life-Created It's a brochure printed by watchtower.org, which redirects to the website for Jehovah's Witnesses. It covers the basic arguments I've seen for years now:
Some new ones I haven't seen before or can't recall:
 I don't expect he's going to like my thoughts on the matter much. Maybe I'll just hand him a slip of paper with this video URL:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVRsWAjvQSg Ken Miller is a molecular and cell biologist and an eminently intelligent individual who presents well the case being made about intelligent design / creationism and evolution. He's also a Catholic, and has no qualms in explaining how objections to evolution aren't evidence based.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:This seems to be one of the main points of being a conservative. This kind of behavior is everywhere, it has no political boundaries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
There are certain metaphysical tensions necessary for the scientific method to work- at some fundamental level, a degree of something that looks like materialism is frequently assumed, just to deal with the problem of induction. Not that this helps anti-evolution arguments, it's just a way of getting out of the brain-in-a-jar problem.
Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Dec 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 19:49
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:There are certain metaphysical tensions necessary for the scientific method to work- at some fundamental level, a degree of something that looks like materialism is frequently assumed, just to deal with the problem of induction. Not that this helps-anti-evolution arguments, it's just a way of getting out of the brain-in-a-jar problem. Yeah, I had a big post typed up about how materialism doesn't presuppose the lack of the "supernatural", and how a consistent supernatural entity is indistinguishable from natural forces, and then I realized that anti-evolution shills will literally make up new "deviations" from the model to "prove" that God has a measurable, inconsistent effect on the process. Like that giant leg bone that's just a model of a bone that was never seen, only described, that "proves" that there were actually giants walking the earth at some point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:13
|
|
|
Sulphuric Sundae posted:An actress I've worked with defriended me around the election last year because I kept responding to her ridiculous and easily-refuted political posts. We had a reunion for the theatre last week and she talked to me for a bit and essentially told me, "It's my Facebook wall and I post what I want, and I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong on there." She re-added me on Facebook, and she's posting all the same crap again. Impeach Obama, fake birth certificate, etc. I guess I'll just unfollow her and leave her alone to be politcally bitter. My initial knee-jerk reaction to hearing "I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong" was "Then why don't you put the work into making sure you're right before opening your mouth?"
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:22
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:My initial knee-jerk reaction to hearing "I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong" was "Then why don't you put the work into making sure you're right before opening your mouth?" The answer I've gotten from more than one person when I've pointed out that literally every piece of evidence, even from sources they approve of, disagrees with them has been "Look, I know what I know, OK? Stop trying to be right about everything." These of course tend to be the same people who literally don't care if they're actually right about something, as long as they can call someone else wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Sulphuric Sundae posted:An actress I've worked with defriended me around the election last year because I kept responding to her ridiculous and easily-refuted political posts. We had a reunion for the theatre last week and she talked to me for a bit and essentially told me, "It's my Facebook wall and I post what I want, and I don't want anyone telling me I'm wrong on there." She re-added me on Facebook, and she's posting all the same crap again. Impeach Obama, fake birth certificate, etc. I guess I'll just unfollow her and leave her alone to be politcally bitter. I've had people telling me not to argue with their posts or straight-up deleting my posts too if I post contradicting facts. I ask them why they post political opinions on a public forum if they don't want to discuss them. I have some conservative friends and I never shy away from a debate over something I've posted. If they persist in posting total bullshit after making it clear they don't want any comments contradicting their opinions then I just unfriend them because I don't need to see them blasting out their opinions in public every day if they're not actually interested in discussion.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:The answer I've gotten from more than one person when I've pointed out that literally every piece of evidence, even from sources they approve of, disagrees with them has been "Look, I know what I know, OK? Stop trying to be right about everything." These of course tend to be the same people who literally don't care if they're actually right about something, as long as they can call someone else wrong. My family tends to lean towards this attitude and it infuriates me. Especially since I'm a teacher by trade, but am currently in grad school and just spend all my free time researching random-rear end topics. So like every other conversation, particularly about politics, goes something like "Hey, did you know <X>?" to which I'll respond "Actually that's a common misconception, it's really <Y>." usually backed up by an article on the topic I've read recently, and only about topics which have explicitly, objectively correct facts. I know well enough not to get involved on religion or any opinion-based politics, only stuff with verifiable answers. Which then inevitably leads to: "Ugh, why do you have to be right all the time?" "I dunno, why do you have to be wrong all the time?  "
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
A lot of people seem to think posting to their Facebook wall has no consequences. It's "their wall" and for some reason they don't have to filter what they post. I had an ex that posted about when we were having relationship issues, and when I objected, she said "it's my wall, I can post whatever I please." Granted, that's an extreme example, but they more or less want an echo chamber to validate what they're feeling when they post something, so if someone challenges it, it destroys their echo chamber and some of them can't handle that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
Doomsayer posted:My family tends to lean towards this attitude and it infuriates me. Especially since I'm a teacher by trade, but am currently in grad school and just spend all my free time researching random-rear end topics. So like every other conversation, particularly about politics, goes something like "Hey, did you know <X>?" to which I'll respond "Actually that's a common misconception, it's really <Y>." usually backed up by an article on the topic I've read recently, and only about topics which have explicitly, objectively correct facts. I know well enough not to get involved on religion or any opinion-based politics, only stuff with verifiable answers. I think sometimes it's just the way you approach it. I imagine that to some people, "Actually, it's XYZ..." comes off as haughty, pedantic, etc. Instead, I've started trying to phrase it more like "You know, I thought the same thing too, but then I found out that XYZ..." I don't collect data on whether or not it actually puts people more at ease, but I feel like it can't hurt.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:There are a set of good policy objections to GMO usage, mostly at the ecological level- invasive species, genetic monoculture, etc. Do you have any evidence to back up those assertions?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:15
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:I think sometimes it's just the way you approach it. Oh absolutely, and don't get me wrong I can be a colossal dick about it in my every day life, but I tread really lightly around family, and am quick to admit when I myself am wrong. It still doesn't change much 
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
Taaaaaaarb! posted:Do you have any evidence to back up those assertions? The Gros Michels ended up being replaced by the Cavendish as the main banana of cultivation in the 1950s, and there are signs that Panama disease may be spreading to them too. Genetic Modification can provide inbuilt disease resistance, but if this is breached then there is no variation to fall back on, unless GM is combined with other forms of crossbreeding.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:31
|
|
|
Ravenfood posted:The font and coloring isn't doing it any favors. It looks like the ramblings of a crazy person aesthetically. But yeah, the actual numbers on there basically show that the vast majority of your taxes go towards corporate subsidies instead of a bunch of personally useful stuff. I really doubt the numbers are accurate, though. The vast majority of the budget is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the military. "An insurance company with an army."
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Jurgan posted:I really doubt the numbers are accurate, though. The vast majority of the budget is Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and the military. "An insurance company with an army." But your federal income taxes don't go to Medicare or Social Security, those come from FICA. Only the military comes from your tax dollars, and it's about 20% of your taxes that go to the military if I recall correctly. The rest goes to funding the government, including corporate subsidies and all the other fun things. Kugyou no Tenshi posted:Is everyone missing that this is an anti Tea Party image? Yea, it feels like a lot of people missed that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:But your federal income taxes don't go to Medicare or Social Security, those come from FICA. Only the military comes from your tax dollars, and it's about 20% of your taxes that go to the military if I recall correctly. The rest goes to funding the government, including corporate subsidies and all the other fun things. 20% of the budget in general is military, which would make it a substantially larger portion of income taxes. However, Medicare actually receives a big part of its budget from general funds as the Medicare tax isn't enough to cover it. e: actually if you want to complicate things more, a decent minority of revenue going into SS is now by ways of the trust fund(SS is in a deficit by payroll taxes alone) which in turn is funded by interest payments on the debt, which comes out of general taxation. Amused to Death fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Dec 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Covering Discendo Vox's butt A better real-life example than the ones I would've given, most of which are hypothetical, since the ecological consequences of GMOs will take time to emerge-and they'll be hard to detect when they do. I'm not categorically against GMOs, but I'd like to see a stronger regulatory infrastructure for their use. Of course, I'd also like it if the FDA's budget was octupled and DSHEA was repealed, but I'm a dreamer that way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 21:59
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:20% of the budget in general is military, which would make it a substantially larger portion of income taxes. How accurate (or, rather, "accurate") is this? http://www.whitehouse.gov/2012-taxreceipt
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:A better real-life example than the ones I would've given, most of which are hypothetical, since the ecological consequences of GMOs will take time to emerge-and they'll be hard to detect when they do. I'm sure this is encompassed in your meaning of "stronger regulatory infrastructure" but one of the biggest problems with regulator agencies is the revolving door with them and the people they regulate. This isn't just a problem with the FDA, but the EPA, SEC, and the MMS (which had oversight over the Deepwater Horizon and is now the BOEMRE, which is presumably not (yet) a revolving door since it's only been around for a few years). It's a serious problem that people like this guy sees (or is it the case of a blind squirrel finding a nut?) but then just goes off the deep end or completely misses the point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 22:13
|
|
|
I agree to an extent- the FDA is relatively clean though- it only has real regulatory capture problems on the pharmaceutical division(and probably tobacco will as well when it gets going, because nobody can figure out how that's supposed to operate). DS, Devices, Cosmetics, and Food tend to be relatively secure from real corruption. The revolving door is not always a clear-cut sign that something is wrong. Case in point: it's true that Mike Taylor had a career at Monsanto before coming to FDA. It's also true that food companies, including Monsanto, now hate his guts because the food division's been more aggressive under his tenure than it has been in years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:28
|
|
|
 From "Barack Obama's dead Fly" facebook group. Any idea what that name is referencing? The guy who posted it unfriended me when I called him a racist douchebag :/
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
Dirt posted:
obama is seen as both black and white (and therefore not really either but that's not really the point of this nickname) -> oreo
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
Dirt posted:
Also, I remember a time when the US dollar's value dropped pretty severely. That was in 2007.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
andrew smash posted:obama is seen as both black and white (and therefore not really either but that's not really the point of this nickname) -> oreo Specifically, black on the outside and white on the inside. He may look and act like a black Democrat, but underneath he's just another in a long line of right-of-center white dudes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:49
|
|
|
I was asking about the dead fly thing haha. What a stupid thing to make a facebook group about.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2013 23:51
|
|
|
Dirt posted:
Hey, if you don't want that because it's worthless, I'll take it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 00:01
|
|
|
Got this one in my feed today, more 2nd amendment worship. I love how bad his text accompanying the post is tho. Every time I read it I start to giggle stupidly.  I pointed out the edit button for him but he thinks "fun owning" is appropriate. edit: VVV I didn't try to refute the argument. The guy is actually pretty cool besides his right wing tendencies. I've even helped him with computer stuff like this before. In this case I was genuinely trying to help. VVV KillerJunglist fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Dec 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Of course the best way to refute someone's argument is to get pedantic about spelling and grammar.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Of course the best way to refute someone's argument is to get pedantic about spelling and grammar. It's pretty amazing how a lot of the conservative status posts on here are filled with absolutely atrocious spelling and grammar, even though we have spell check now that puts red squiggles under misspelled words and lets you fix them easily. But yes, attacking that part of their argument will just get you a "It's the Internet, why do you care about spelling?" response. Because it's easier to read, you fuckwits, and it doesn't make you look like a moron.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:[*]Genesis isn't literal days but "creative period" days that could be longer: I know it's not meant to be used this way in Genesis, but my understanding is that this is actually true. It's not really that weird, our word day has multiple meanings with multiple lengths of time, just in Hebrew one of their meanings is similar to the English "age" (as in bronze age)
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:The Gros Michel banana is a good example of why genetic monoculture can be disastrous. Bananas are not grown from seed, they're propagated via clone, which means that each banana cultivar has a high level of genetic similarity. If this culture happens to be prone to disease or if a pathogen adapts or spreads to it, as was the case with Panama disease and the Gros Michel, the result is that none of the clones have any immunity and impact on food production is severe. There is a problem with this example - yes, it is technically a genetically modified crop, but not one that has been manipulated at the chromosomal level. Even more, these and arguably drat near all other crops raised by humans are not examples of transgenic crops that get people freaked out about GMO's. Further, you even point out how GM can benefit this particular crop. Discendo Vox posted:A better real-life example than the ones I would've given, most of which are hypothetical, since the ecological consequences of GMOs will take time to emerge-and they'll be hard to detect when they do. Which are... what? So far every proposed ecological consequence I have seen of GMOs has been refuted by scientists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Gentleman Baller posted:I know it's not meant to be used this way in Genesis, but my understanding is that this is actually true. It's not really that weird, our word day has multiple meanings with multiple lengths of time, just in Hebrew one of their meanings is similar to the English "age" (as in bronze age) I mean if you squinted a bit and ignored the fact that the sun doesn't exist until halfway through the process, you can sort of see a metaphorical depiction of the evolution of life, but there's really no way that you can take it literally whether a 'day' is a day or a billion years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
Strudel Man posted:It doesn't really matter if you consider them literal days or long periods of time when the order doesn't fit the facts, either. Genesis goes Earth -> Light -> Sky -> Land -> Plants -> Sun/Moon/Stars -> Fish/Birds -> Land Animals -> Humans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 01:57
|
|
|
I thought "oreo" was a term of derision among black people? To a white conservative, wouldn't an "oreo" be "one of the good ones?" Also: bitcoin, end the fed Guilty Spork posted:
You mean when it began to look like Obama might have a shot at becoming president?
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 02:10
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:I thought "oreo" was a term of derision among black people? To a white conservative, wouldn't an "oreo" be "one of the good ones?" According to the loud people on the talking boxes, black democrats aren't as black as black Republicans, and just prove that Democrats are the real racists. If Herman Cain had been elected President, GOP talking heads were more or less saying he would have been the first real black President.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 02:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 12:47 |
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:According to the loud people on the talking boxes, black democrats aren't as black as black Republicans, and just prove that Democrats are the real racists. If Herman Cain had been elected President, GOP talking heads were more or less saying he would have been the first real black President. I thought they liked to say Reagan was the first black president. For God only knows what contrived bullshit reasons
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2013 02:53
|
|
