Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Wow! Waiting for One Brow to chime in that Google also revises the resumes of liberals when they step out of line.
A Place for Conservatives
- Thread starter Heathme
- Start date
Getting Traded
Banned
Yes, and read this, it should give us pause:
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/...0403Z1_B_UCM&et_cid=DM278220&et_rid=583090884
I believe jury is still out on this. Apparently, the person who alleged this has been discredited but there are still unanswered questions. Just because mainstream propaganda is trying to crush this narrative doesn't mean there is no substance to it. The uptick in autism is not merely due to increased diagnosis but likely has an environmental component, as do the increases in other neurological conditions.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Many many actual studies have shown no correlation between vaccines and autism. A few dubious outliers do not disprove or throw any doubt on that conclusion.
Getting Traded
Banned
They have a huge vested interest in GMOs because they created them as well as the pesticides used with them. They are synonymous with GMOs. They just lost another multi-million dollar law suit that found them liable for glyphosate's role in causing someone's cancer.
Getting Traded
Banned
They do not disprove but I think you'd be surprised that there are more than a few outliers. Here's some info provided by a reputable alternative health activist: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/disease/autism-spectrum-disorders
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Are you talking about Monsanto? I looked into it a bit last time @justthetip (or whatever the hell handlers goes by now) was in here clubbing the usual suspects and left with the impression it was all a bunch of b.s. pushed by the anti-GMO Europeans. Entrapment by their contract kept getting brought up so I read it for myself. It was a whopping four pages long or something and nothing unusual at all. Just a bunch of hype pushed for unsuspecting dolts to lap up, wrapped in the same old corporate Murica evil wrapping paper. Even every farmer I found through google was saying it's all nonsense.
Maybe I'm missing something but the Monsanto narrative I went in with was not what I walked out with.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Cancer is Gods way of punishing farmers for forcing communism onto all of us with their trillions in subsidies. Please stop condemning the Lord.
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Yeah I believe it's an underserved rep, however I was going at the concept that company = evil therefore every output of said company = evil. I'm not a fan of absolutes. Absolutes are never right!
Plus I figured we were far enough in for some Godwin action up in here.
Getting Traded
Banned
Anti-GMO Euros ... lol. No, we're brainwashed in this country by the Monsanto P-R machine (now they're Bayer with the merger). I guess the fact they're losing these lawsuits is because anti-GMO Euros? You think science might have something to do with it? Plus Monsanto has been found to be using deceptive methods to propagandize their position. For example, GMO advocate Professor Kevin Folta of the University of Florida was found to be receiving funds from Monsanto to use his position as the head of the school's Botany department to promote GMOs as harmless. Henry I. Miller of the Stanford Institute, a former FDA employee, was using his byline on articles in Forbes magazine that were actually written by Monsanto lobbyists -- and he was fired for this. I actually had running debates with both of these individuals before they were exposed, questioning some of their claims, which they never were able to adequately explain. I was surprised to find that my suspicions were correct.
Red
Well-Known Member
Regarding Dr. Moore and Greenpeace, I would think they would in fact know who were the founding members, but, at any rate, this is how they word their opinion of claims that he was a co-founder:
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/greenpeace-statement-on-patric/
"Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cote, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace’s response are available here (PDF)."
Obviously, you can click on the PDF above to read Moore's letter.
I would find it hard to believe that Greenpeace would put out this statement with a view toward slinging BS just to disassociate themselves from any connection to Dr. Moore. If he were a co-founder, in their view of their own history, admitting as much would not reflect on their own purpose and mission. They could simply portray him as one "who went astray" or however they would wish to word it. It would not reflect poorly on them at all. From the statement above, it would seem they were clear that there were three individuals regarded as the founding members. So I don't see why they would feel they would need to lie and re-write their own history. If he was not a co-founder, on the other hand, I can understand why they would want to make that fact clear, given their attitude toward climate change, and those of Dr. Moore.
https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/greenpeace-statement-on-patric/
"Patrick Moore frequently portrays himself as a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace, and many news outlets have repeated this characterization. Although Mr. Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace. Phil Cote, Irving Stowe, and Jim Bohlen founded Greenpeace in 1970. Patrick Moore applied for a berth on the Phyllis Cormack in March, 1971 after the organization had already been in existence for a year. A copy of his application letter and Greenpeace’s response are available here (PDF)."
Obviously, you can click on the PDF above to read Moore's letter.
I would find it hard to believe that Greenpeace would put out this statement with a view toward slinging BS just to disassociate themselves from any connection to Dr. Moore. If he were a co-founder, in their view of their own history, admitting as much would not reflect on their own purpose and mission. They could simply portray him as one "who went astray" or however they would wish to word it. It would not reflect poorly on them at all. From the statement above, it would seem they were clear that there were three individuals regarded as the founding members. So I don't see why they would feel they would need to lie and re-write their own history. If he was not a co-founder, on the other hand, I can understand why they would want to make that fact clear, given their attitude toward climate change, and those of Dr. Moore.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Did you read this: https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2019/03/18/google-scrubs-greenpeace-co-founder-protect-aoc/
Regardless of whether you think it makes sense for Greenpeace to rewrite their history, it appears that they have chosen to do just that, and Google is helping them out.