|
sweeperbravo posted:Is it one dick, sucking on apples, or is it apples which suck dick? The ambiguity adds to the value It's dick van dyke eating his lunch, actually. You people are gross.
|
# ? Oct 12, 2016 19:27 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 02:14 |
|
You'd think you wouldn't want to pick a NSFW URL for your entirely SFW products. http://www.fagasstraps.com/
|
# ? Oct 13, 2016 22:56 |
|
Their company is named Evans Co
|
# ? Oct 13, 2016 23:17 |
|
Why would you name your website after just one of the products you sell?
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 00:24 |
|
Phanatic posted:Ruth's Chris in Ann Arbor ran a promotion for the Michigan game: For every point by which Michigan beat Rutgers, you get a 1% discount. My dad took advantage of this deal this past week. Apparently it was still an expensive steak at half off. Also apparently the U of M coach was eating there that night too.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 02:21 |
|
Choco1980 posted:My dad took advantage of this deal this past week. Apparently it was still an expensive steak at half off. Also apparently the U of M coach was eating there that night too. https://twitter.com/CoachJim4UM/status/786010335677263872
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 02:28 |
|
Don't go to http://www.fag.com
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 02:53 |
|
I think this is the thread this fits in. My peanut butter doesn't have an expiration date but it does say "PARTIALLY PRODUCED WITH GENETIC ENGINEERING"
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 03:07 |
|
That man is really overdressed for a steak joint. Tofu Terry posted:I think this is the thread this fits in. My peanut butter doesn't have an expiration date but it does say "PARTIALLY PRODUCED WITH GENETIC ENGINEERING" What country is this? Unless they're required by law to label GMOs, I can't see why they'd think saying that would be a good marketing move.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 03:08 |
|
Non Serviam posted:What country is this? Unless they're required by law to label GMOs, I can't see why they'd think saying that would be a good marketing move. I don't know where he lives, but here in Vermont they passed a law a few months back requiring GMO products to be labeled, which has just resulted in 90% of food products having the "Partially Produced with Genetic Engineering" label on them somewhere now. It's pretty pointless and was just a massive headache for supermarkets and caused big companies like Coke to threaten to pull their products entirely from the state, though none of them followed through afaik.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 03:23 |
|
I'm in the US, in Georgia specifically. I've never seen this sort of label before but also I got it at one of those "overstock or about to expire" grocery stores.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 03:26 |
|
Tofu Terry posted:I'm in the US, in Georgia specifically. I've never seen this sort of label before but also I got it at one of those "overstock or about to expire" grocery stores. That makes sense, I've never seen that brand but those units were probably meant for sale in Vermont and they printed it on too many or something. No other states have implemented a law like that yet that I'm aware of.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 03:42 |
|
salty fries make me cry posted:That makes sense, I've never seen that brand but those units were probably meant for sale in Vermont and they printed it on too many or something. No other states have implemented a law like that yet that I'm aware of. The Vermont law got co-opted by a last minute watered down federal law. So who knows what that label is about. Maybe the product is also sold in Europe.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 04:09 |
|
Krispy Kareem posted:The Vermont law got co-opted by a last minute watered down federal law. So who knows what that label is about. Maybe the product is also sold in Europe. That's true, but there's still a ton of stuff in stores here with those labels on them from before that happened, and we still get stuff in our shipments at work with the original "may be genetically modified" labels on them. Most are just stickers but a lot are printed like the jar posted earlier, and some products actually incorporated it with the allergy information right on the label. It'll probably be a few years before they're out of circulation since so many got made when the law first got passed.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 04:50 |
|
Why do people loving care about gmo's so much? Is there any case ever where gmos ave even does something bad or are people afraid of "playing god with my food and injecting chemicals into it"? I love this picture though
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 05:00 |
|
stringball posted:Why do people loving care about gmo's so much? Is there any case ever where gmos ave even does something bad or are people afraid of "playing god with my food and injecting chemicals into it"? Pretty much the exact same reasons people are afraid of vaccines, with as much justification. http://www.slate.com/articles/healt...and_errors.html Phanatic has a new favorite as of 05:15 on Oct 14, 2016 |
# ? Oct 14, 2016 05:08 |
|
People see the word "genetic" and think scientists are shooting apples with mutation rays when we've been genetically engineering food for centuries with selective breeding of produce.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 05:15 |
|
Waffleman_ posted:People see the word "genetic" and think scientists are shooting apples with mutation rays when we've been genetically engineering food for centuries with selective breeding of produce. We've also done it by shooting apples with mutation rays. Literally: exposing a bunch of seeds to gamma radiation sources to induce mutations and keeping and breeding the ones that germinated with useful traits. There's stuff on supermarket shelves that was created in exactly that way. Which is funny because GMO opponents claim genetic modification is more unpredictable unlike the older tools of selection and breeding, when in fact it's far more precise and controllable then stuff like atomic gardens that they have no problem with.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 05:19 |
|
Phanatic posted:We've also done it by shooting apples with mutation rays. Literally: exposing a bunch of seeds to gamma radiation sources to induce mutations and keeping and breeding the ones that germinated with useful traits. There's stuff on supermarket shelves that was created in exactly that way. Ha ha nice.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 05:35 |
|
Bertrand Hustle posted:Why would you name your website after just one of the products you sell? Since everything they sell is Fagas strap related, they thought they'd be clever to register the name of the item they specialize in as their url rather than the name of their company, so when Grandpa goes on the internet and just types a noun and then a dot com he will find them. I don't know why Fagas straps are called Fagas straps, though
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 06:29 |
|
I think I've seen two somewhat legitimate arguments against genetic engineering. The first is that the companies involved are unscrupulous, which is true but doesn't really relate to the process or the concept of GMOs as such. The second is that it's leading to increased frailty and unsustainability of the plant species involved, beyond the scale of the gradual genetic engineering of the past centuries and millennia, because they are only selecting for things like size and taste without regards to anything else. This actually strikes me as a legitimate concern. But yes, 90% of the opposition comes from a poor understanding of genetics.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 06:48 |
|
stringball posted:Why do people loving care about gmo's so much? Is there any case ever where gmos ave even does something bad or are people afraid of "playing god with my food and injecting chemicals into it"? I used to be in favor of GMO labeling, since I thought that having that information wouldn't hurt. Then I looked into the science of GMO food and saw that a. Everything we eat is the product of some sort of genetic modification, b. It creates the impression in the consumer that there's something to be afraid of.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 07:29 |
|
I wonder if the FDA can/will do something like making the non-gmo labels also include a disclaimer that non-gmo foods aren't proven to be any healthier for or safer for you Considering they make people put disclaimers on medication and such and aren't afraid to put labels like that on snake oils and other bogus supplements The outcry would be hilarious but I don't know if they care about the massive shitstorm that would follow
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 07:54 |
|
stringball posted:I wonder if the FDA can/will do something like making the non-gmo labels also include a disclaimer that non-gmo foods aren't proven to be any healthier for or safer for you USDA is in the pocket of BIG ORGANIC. You can’t irradiate food (you know, to kill e. coli and co.) and label it organic. Heating it up so it loses all the flavour: that’s perfectly alright. Remember, kids: industrial pressure cookers are natural. Ionising radiation is not.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 08:28 |
|
Phlegmish posted:I think I've seen two somewhat legitimate arguments against genetic engineering. The first is that the companies involved are unscrupulous, which is true but doesn't really relate to the process or the concept of GMOs as such. The second is that it's leading to increased frailty and unsustainability of the plant species involved, beyond the scale of the gradual genetic engineering of the past centuries and millennia, because they are only selecting for things like size and taste without regards to anything else. This actually strikes me as a legitimate concern. They're also selecting for things like herbicide resistance and natural pesticide production, which often involves inserting genes from totally different plant species, and I was under the impression that that was the major pushback. Then, they're also selecting for hardiness and soil tolerance, too.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 11:44 |
|
Phanatic posted:We've also done it by shooting apples with mutation rays. Literally: exposing a bunch of seeds to gamma radiation sources to induce mutations and keeping and breeding the ones that germinated with useful traits. There's stuff on supermarket shelves that was created in exactly that way. This is how we made ruby red grapefruit, by the way ☢️🌝☢️
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 12:01 |
|
Ralph Crammed In posted:It was censored, but still. Aside from the problematic nature of having cultivators of apples advertise, as a woman I now associate that brand of apple with the selfish eagerness of chucklefucks trying to get their dicks sucked. I hope there's a alternate ad were some chicklefuck comes out and goes "I like three things - (apple brand), caramel, and getting my box eaten out!"
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 12:05 |
|
Phanatic posted:We've also done it by shooting apples with mutation rays. Literally: exposing a bunch of seeds to gamma radiation sources to induce mutations and keeping and breeding the ones that germinated with useful traits.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 12:17 |
|
Apples with teeth would be able to protect themselves from vermin
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 12:28 |
|
Helps with getting your dick sucked?
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 12:34 |
|
stringball posted:I love this picture though
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 13:18 |
|
AgentF posted:Helps with getting your dick sucked? I prefer the toothless dick sucking apples personally
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 13:28 |
|
Phlegmish posted:because they are only selecting for things like size and taste without regards to anything else. This actually strikes me as a legitimate concern. This would be a legitimate concern if it had any basis in reality. If. ArcMage posted:They're also selecting for things like herbicide resistance and natural pesticide production, which often involves inserting genes from totally different plant species, and I was under the impression that that was the major pushback. That would be the "poor understanding of genetics" part, yes. Edit: Just for the sake of it, the most common actually-based-on-reason argument against large-scale GMO farming is that plants engineered for drought resistance, natural pesticides, et cetera would have a competitive advantage against wild plants and become a highly aggressive invasive species if they spread into the wild. There are some ideas on how to compensate for that outside of the usual measures for dealing with invasive species (like a modification that would make pollination dependent on human activity or something else found on farms but not outside them), but those solutions of course have their own varied drawbacks (eg. depending on artificial pollination is unfeasibly labour intensive for grasses, but may work fine for something with a smaller number of individual plants). Waci has a new favorite as of 13:46 on Oct 14, 2016 |
# ? Oct 14, 2016 13:30 |
|
Waci posted:This would be a legitimate concern if it had any basis in reality. If. Ever wonder why you don't really see many farmed plants in the wild? That's because plants that we farm can't actually compete with wild plants and already rely on humans to provide the proper conditions for them. Traits like herbicide resistance are a disadvantage in the wild if nobody's spraying herbicide everywhere. GMOs will be basically the same way.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 13:59 |
|
They throw a fit about "frankenfoods" but the real horrors are "natural" like how broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, and cauliflower are all the same species and how bananas can no longer breed without human assistance.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 14:06 |
|
BattleMaster posted:They throw a fit about "frankenfoods" but the real horrors are "natural" like how broccoli, brussels sprouts, cabbage, and cauliflower are all the same species and how bananas can no longer breed without human assistance. I really want those people to try eating natural wild bananas
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 14:11 |
|
Phimosissy posted:I prefer the toothless dick sucking apples personally Come on! Live a little! Don't kink shame!
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 14:42 |
|
Slime posted:Ever wonder why you don't really see many farmed plants in the wild? That's because plants that we farm can't actually compete with wild plants and already rely on humans to provide the proper conditions for them. Traits like herbicide resistance are a disadvantage in the wild if nobody's spraying herbicide everywhere. GMOs will be basically the same way. Oh, I agree the risk is often exaggerated, and like you said the same methods are already used for controlling crop lines created through slower means. Still, it is a more relevant concern for some traits than others. Herbicides might not happen in the wild, but droughts do.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 16:01 |
|
While on the subject of GMO horrorfruits, a few results for "natural watermelon" (basically the only ones that weren't about how it gets your dick hard) Bonus:
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 16:08 |
|
|
# ? May 21, 2024 02:14 |
|
There's also the example of the papaya. GMO papayas saved the papaya industry in Hawaii. Without them, the plants would have been wiped out by ringspot disease.
|
# ? Oct 14, 2016 18:05 |