Volatility

February 17, 2015

By Their Own Standard, Credentialist Pro-GMO Activists Are Ignorant Yahoos

>

The US Right to Know issued a Freedom of Information request to universities where four prominent pro-GMO activists are housed. The four – Kevin Folta at the University of Florida, Alison Eenennaam at UC Davis, Richard Goodman at the U of Nebraska, and Bruce Chassy at the U of Illinois – were selected for being prolific pro-Monsanto publicists, and particularly for their participation at the cartel propaganda site GMO Answers. US Right to Know wants to learn the extent of their direct or indirect funding and payments from biotech corporations and trade groups. Of course they’re stonewalling, since they know the extent of the corruption an honest answer would expose. And anyway they’re professional liars, so transparency and truth just aren’t what they do.
.
Cadres such as these are usually called “scientists”, solely on account of the formal credentials they’ve procured, but they are in fact not scientists at all but corporate propagandists. They do nothing but knowingly tell lies, claim knowledge where they have none, and intentionally or out of stupidity confuse the nature of every issue. All the while they sanctimoniously insist that anyone who lacks formal scientific credentials is unqualified to speak about GMOs. (This of course applies only to critics, skeptics, and dissidents. It doesn’t apply to corporate executives or pro-GMO politicians and media flacks.) The best proof of this, as well as of their hypocrisy when they play the credential card, is that literally none of them, so far as I have seen, stays within the bounds of their own disciplines when pontificating about GMOs. On the contrary, every credentialed pro-GM activist evidently feels free to spew the most ignorant, idiotic opinions on any subject imaginable, no matter how unqualified they are according to their own credentialist standard. Our four subjects of the US Right to Know request are typical examples of this promiscuous amateurism of ignorance. By their own standard they have no standing or right to make the vast majority of their assertions and comments. We must hold them to their own standard and reject out of hand anything any of them says which isn’t firmly within the bounds of their formally credentialed discipline.
.
Kevin Folta’s official credentials are in molecular biology and biology, but he thinks he’s an agronomist. His resume is that of a terminal myopic who obsessively knows one detail, and a malign one at that, but who has the delusion of grandeur that he knows the slightest bit about agronomic systems and the broader ecosystems in which these are enfolded. That’s what you’re prone to get when a molecular biologist thinks he’s an agricultural and ecological expert. If he believes a word of the lies he spews, his lack of agricultural training must play a role in his being so stupid.
.
Like his fellow anti-science hack Pamela Ronald, Folta also poses as a medical doctor and nutritionist even though he has zero credentials in either discipline. He also pontificates constantly on purely political issues like labeling and lies about his university receiving funding from the GMO cartel.
.
Folta claims he’s never been paid by the GMO cartel, but his university has certainly been bought. Check out this list. Res ipsa loquitur.
.
Bruce Chassy is officially trained in chemistry and biochemistry. In other words he’s a poison-peddler whose formal connection to systems-based knowledge is even more tenuous than Folta’s. This hasn’t stopped him from impersonating a doctor and nutritionist who knows something about food safety and human health, nor has it stopped the University of Illinois and the FDA from fraudulently depicting him as such.
.
Chassy is co-founder of the propaganda site Academics Review. Here we find lots of commentary on food safety, human medicine, agriculture, and slamming Jeffrey Smith for his lack of formal STEM credentials. But what praytell is Chassy’s credential which qualifies him to have opinions on any of these topics? The fact is that from the point of view of credentialism, Chassy is identical to Smith. They’re uncredentialed laymen writing about subjects in which they have no formal training. The same is true of Chassy’s collaborator David Tribe (chemistry, biochemistry, applied molecular genetics). The same is true of every pro-GMO activist. I challenge anyone to provide an example of a pro-GMO activist who stays within the bounds of his credentialed discipline.
.
In Chassy’s case there’s no doubt about his being directly paid by Monsanto and other biotech companies. In general he’s been more active as a propagandist than as someone who even pretends to be a scientist. He was also the sole credentialed type who joined several uncredentialed publicists in trying to drum up an Internet lynch mob against Reuters reporter Carey Gillam last year. That says it all about Chassy’s real character and ideology and how much it has to do with “science”.
.
Folta and Chassy are typical in having no formal agricultural training. Most genetic engineers and “scientist” flacks like these (for example carnival barker Neal DeGrasse Tyson, who has also shilled for Monsanto in the most ignorant, moronic way) have zero formal agronomic qualifications. Indeed, when you read a history like First the Seed or Lords of the Harvest you see how often the engineers and publicists not only have zero agricultural training or knowledge but seem proud of the fact. This combination of ignorance and arrogance, always characteristic of credentialed technocrats and elitist professionals in general, must be why GMOs are such shoddy, failure-prone products, and why they’re 100% dedicated to escalating the most counterproductive, destructive, and famine-prone mode of agriculture. It’s simply insane the way society has let such brain-dead psychopaths gain control of our agriculture and foods.
.
Meanwhile the personnel who do have some agriculture-related training are just as prone to go straying far outside their disciplinary lines while still fraudulently claiming to be “scientists”. Richard Goodman’s formal training is a mix of agricultural and non-agricultural – biology, dairy science, immunology.
.
Goodman is most notorious for his suspected role in the illicit retraction of the Seralini study by the now-corrupted journal Food and Chemical Toxiciology. The Seralini study is a real scientific study correcting the fraudulent Monsanto feeding trials which the EFSA accepted on faith when it approved the importation into Europe of Roundup Ready maize in food and feed. It remains one of the few legitimate toxicology studies which have been performed on a GMO (or on Roundup). Through a British media campaign of lies and slander which started even before the study was published, FCT came under intense industry pressure to retract the study. At first it refused. At this point the cartel shifted its pressure on the publication. The pro-GMO activists now accused it of being biased against GMOs. To prove its lack of bias, it was forced to accept Monsanto’s man onto its editorial roster. The truth is, of course, the exact opposite. At first FCT was demonstrating its lack of bias either way, and was serving science. It was then forced to accept Goodman so that it could be subject to Gleichschaltung, attaining the ideologically correct pro-Monsanto bias, from within.
.
FCT’s cowardly action now demonstrates how well this corporate coordination process has worked. You can look at their excuse for the retraction and see that it’s nothing but a retread of the same tired lies which attacked the study from day one. If FCT refused to retract on these grounds in 2012, why did it do so in 2013, just a few months after bringing Goodman on board? Because it was taken over from within, following the injection of a Monsanto cadre. There’s no other explanation.
.
What precisely in Goodman’s formal resume qualifies him to pass any sort of judgement or have any opinion at all about a toxicology study performed upon rats? It’s not an allergy study nor was it performed upon cows.
.
Goodman has been an employee of Monsanto and has consulted for them and other biotech corporations
.
Alison van Eenennaam’s formal training is in agricultural science, animal science, and genetics. Yet Here’s Eenennaam blathering about politics and economics, posing as a constitutional scholar, impersonating an expert on food safety and human medicine, and telling several direct lies, for example that pesticide use goes down with GMO cultivation; that product labeling where it comes to harmful ingredients is typically voluntary; that GMO labeling will drive up food costs, and several others. She also regurgitates the canned lie that genetic engineering is the same as conventional breeding. If she really believes this she’s an incompetent agronomist. But I’d bet she’s consciously lying. We saw the scurrilous character of her “science” in the propaganda broadside she issued on Monsanto’s behalf last autumn. Here’s the best takedown of this hack I’ve seen. Here’s another good refutation.
.
She also endorses the non-credentialed PR flack Jon Entine’s unscientific rhetorical flourishes about her “review”, which demonstrates how she sees her “scientific” work as designed to feed the Monsanto propaganda machine.
.
Like Goodman, Eenennaam has been employed by Monsanto, and her university receives funding from Monsanto and a host of Big Ag corporations.
.
GMO labeling has certainly brought the amateur interlopers out in force. This pro-cartel paper parroting the Monsanto line against GMO labeling includes Eenennaam and Chassy among its authors and Goodman among its “reviewers”, alongside Mark Lynas sporting his phony Cornell pseudo-position, bought for him by the Gates Foundation. Here again we see alleged scientists holding forth on a purely political issue, as well as economics, law, constitutional scholarship, and statistical social science. My, we must be in the presence of the most prodigious polymath geniuses in history. Also the most incorrigible liars*.
.
Regarding the standing of these persons to comment on political controversies, some readers may be thinking that’s anyone’s right no matter who they are. But keep in mind that it’s precisely these cadres who consistently deny that the people have any right to a say on any issue which the corporate propaganda machine can depict as having anything to do with “science”. On the contrary, they insist that an issue like GMO labeling should be out of the hands of democracy and solely within the hands of corporate technocracy. Indeed, to the extent these cadres can be said to have a political ideology beyond straight corporate authoritarianism, this ideology is technocracy, the belief that formally credentialed experts should make all decisions for society, while democracy and politics as such should cease to exist. This is an extreme version of the standard anti-citizenship, anti-democracy, anti-political character of bourgeois ideology. (You won’t find a more perfect example of one of these amateurish hacks describing his own faction than the abstract of this paper. The thing is a short masterpiece of Orwellianism, and of course is packed with lies. The conclusion, of course, is true and condemns these criminals and their whole endeavor.)
.
Here too we reject their authoritarianism, but we should hold them to their own standard. They despise democracy and politics and want to abolish these for everyone else, so we must see them as having forfeited such things for themselves.
.
Of course among pro-GM activists there’s no lack of uncredentialed publicists, from former TV news/tabloid producer Jon Entine to nihilist mercenary Mark Lynas to software thief Bill Gates, not to mention an endless list of corporate executives and PR flacks, politicians, and corporate media stenographers. Why do we never see the credentialists direct these people, who “have no discernable scientific training” in the allegedly damning words the Academics Review site utters about Smith, to depart from the field?
.
I stress that we abolitionists aren’t credentialists. Most of the worthwhile thinkers throughout history weren’t formally trained system drones, whose record in every era for being wrong about pretty much everything is unmatched. We paraphrase Martin Luther King and see the world in terms judging people not by the level of their formal training within the corporate degree conveyor belt but by the content of their ideas and character. These hacks fail on both counts. But these pro-GMO activists, so many of them part of the corporate establishment including holding its bogus credentials, insist shrilly on the importance of credentialism. We shall hold them to their own standard, and so we must with all due rigor call attention every time any of these “scientists” crosses the bounds of his discipline and starts blathering about things which, by his own standard, he has no standing or right to blather.
.
An important point we must always make is that these “scientifically credentialed” personnel always take every opportunity to claim that lack of formal credentials means one is unqualified to talk about GMOs, but meanwhile all of them without exception incessantly stray beyond the bounds of their own formal disciplines to amateurishly comment on other scientific aspects, let alone on socioeconomic effects or political policy like when so-called “scientists” pontificate against labeling, as the targets of this FOIA request all have. Let’s hold these hypocrites to their own standard and point out what uncredentialed, unscientific, ignorant, opinion-spouting layman yahoos they really are in almost everything they say.
.
We critics and skeptics and dissidents from GMOs and poison-based agriculture must stop calling these people “scientists”. No matter what their formal credentials, they act and speak mostly outside the bounds of those disciplines, and they lie and distort even the rare times they do speak within their theoretical discipline. We must see them as and call them what they are – publicists, propagandists, unregistered lobbyists, pro-corporate political activists, charlatans, quacks, impersonators. That’s what they are and that’s all they are.
.
The pro-GMO activists have proclaimed the credentialist standard. Of course we reject their authoritarianism here as we do everywhere else, so it doesn’t apply to us and we don’t apply it in general. But since they proclaimed it, it rightfully applies to themselves, and we shall apply it to them with all due rigor. So OUR standard must be that whenever a credentialed cadre opens his lying yap to exalt Monsanto, we declare the facial inadmissibility of every word except for what is strictly within the bounds of that cadre’s formal discipline. By their own proclaimed standard they have forfeited all right to make any comment beyond these bounds. And this is the standard we must encourage the people to apply to all scientism/technocrat types, where it comes to GMOs and to every other context where technician types lie and pretend to be scientists, but are really nothing but gutter corporate shills. Q.E.D.
.
.
[*For anyone interested, here’s a list of the lies I spotted just skimming the thing: That there’s a lack of evidence for the health dangers of GMOs – there’s actually overwhelming positive and negative evidence of danger (the negative evidence is the fact that governments and corporations refuse to perform legitimate food safety or epidemiological tests, which is implicit proof that they know GMOs are harmful and don’t want to contribute to scientifically proving that fact); that labeling of hazardous ingredients is always voluntary; that labeling will increase food prices; fraudulent Wall Street-type numbers on the “economic benefits” of GMOs; that genetic engineering is even similar to (let alone the same as) conventional breeding; that GMOs aren’t “in the food” and that being a GMO is really an ineffable “process” rather than a physical fact (I think this peculiar proposition deserves a post of its own); that they’ve been “extensively tested” – actually they were never tested at all except for some ad hoc independent studies which all found evidence of health harms; that the FDA evaluates GMOs – in the vast majority of cases the FDA does zero evaluation, and doesn’t even have to be notified when a new GMO is being marketed; that there exists “independent research” and “long-term research” which vindicates GMOs – no studies of either kind exist; it calls industry groups and professional coordination bodies “scientific organizations”; that no compositional differences have been found between GMOs and non-GM equivalents – of course a GMO containing one or more transgenes plus Bt endotoxins and/or cellularly suffused herbicide residues is by definition compositionally different, and studies have found many other examples of genetic and phytochemical difference in every commercialized GMO which has been independently tested for such difference (again, governments and corporations don’t test at all).
.
I think my favorite part is where they say the absence of GMO-based products on the supermarket shelves in countries which have mandatory labeling is in some metaphysical way because of the label itself, rather than as the result of consumers seeing the label and rejecting the product. In the legal/constitutional/political discussion the paper gives some good hints of the corporate totalitarianism these thugs want.]

>

Advertisements

41 Comments

  1. Brilliant writing Russ.

    There’s a youtube vid you or readers might find of value, type in Rothschilds Puppet Masters Trillionaire Family, that should bring it up, about 55 minutes, over 1 million views, begins with a discussion of the 19th Century Bearer Bond market.

    A bit watered down but still mind boggling, fits well with other researchers and historians I have read, basic history they don’t teach in school, I don’t see references but many research leads for anyone interested. A family that controlled over half the world’s wealth. Very helpful in understanding how corporations are controlled through their boards, which are controlled by the intelligence agencies, which are all controlled at the transnational level by elites, who have a habit of doing things like funding all sides in wars… Nice folks.

    Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 17, 2015 @ 4:30 pm

    • Thanks Tom. Planting wheat this year?

      Comment by Russ — February 17, 2015 @ 5:17 pm

      • Last Fall I replanted the “Globe” wheat I had grown the previous winter, from Kusa Seed Society, and so hopefully it’s growing as we speak. Last year it came up in February and I harvested it in April (I only had planted 50 seeds). I’m up in Illinois so will have to get down to Florida where it is growing, soon. Kind of a hassle but for long distance farming, wheat could be the ticket.

        Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 17, 2015 @ 6:43 pm

      • That’s long distance farming all right. My farm plot is about a 15 minute drive, which is sometimes a hindrance. When do you plant for an April harvest?

        Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 3:25 am

      • I plant in November, and the wheat starts coming up in February. This is in north Florida. As I mentioned once, I had thought it never grew when I first tried this, went out to plant potatoes in Feb and saw the wheat was sprouting.

        Yeah long distance farming was not the original plan. I lived out on the land for a couple years, the county blocked me at every turn, wanted to recycle a house nearby and build s simple cabin, composting toilet, a few other simple eco friendly structures… they nixed it all.

        Anyway we talked about this before, how I tried to form a community of 25 like minded people who would each buy five acres, but in unison… and gave up and went to plan B, five acres alone… and now I’m up in Illinois where my kin are, seems to be my karma … but good things have come from that land in florida…

        Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 18, 2015 @ 11:07 am

  2. Very informative, Russ. Here’s a link to an interesting piece by Kevin Ryan about humbug science.

    Have you encountered Ronald Herring’s work on BT Cotton?

    I learned of him when I watched the following video:

    I found his lecture a complete waste of time.

    Like Specter, Herring becomes indignant about opponents of GMO who, he says, deprive poor Third World farmers of the benefits and wonders of modern technology.

    He’s at Cornell. Here’s his CV

    http://government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/faculty/cv/herring_cv.pdf

    Comment by Brooks Anderson — February 17, 2015 @ 11:21 pm

    • Thanks Brooks. Herring’s lies are the same as Qaim’s. By now it seems that once you’ve heard one of these hacks you’ve heard them all. No wonder, since all they have is the same fairly short list of canned lies. They’re becoming more shrill as their ability to convincingly lie diminishes. Everyone knows GMOs are shoddy, worthless products which are politically, economically, agronomically, genetically, ecologically, and physiologically destructive and have no redeeming qualities. By now all the GMO cartel and its flunkeys has is brute force, might makes right. And little by little, that preponderance of force is diminishing as well. Eventually humanity will meet force with force, and that’ll be the end for this criminal onslaught.

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 3:32 am

  3. Sorry, here’s the link to Kevin Ryan’s piece:

    http://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/science-died-wtc/

    Comment by Brooks Anderson — February 17, 2015 @ 11:27 pm

    • Thanks Brooks. I don’t care about “who” did 9/11, since regardless the US government immediately seized upon it as a windfall and pretext to escalate the imperial war and the corporate assault. So the US government owns and affirms 9/11 by any measure. But the piece does make good general points about how “scientists” are mostly flunkeys of power.

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 3:41 am

  4. I have recently talked to a couple of people whose children idolize Neil DeGrasse Tyson. It’s so hard for me to restrain myself from saying “Do you know what a corporate slave he really is?” I mean these are people who are against Monsanto. Argh!

    Comment by DualPersonality — February 18, 2015 @ 3:29 am

    • Then don’t restrain yourself. 🙂 You can say it in less assertive terms, of course. The same needs to be said of National Geographic, which plays the same “populist” corporate scientism shill role.

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 3:36 am

  5. Hey, Thanks Russ! Just a quick comment or two. First, there is no “stonewalling”. The first thing I did was pick up a phone and call US-RTK to answer his questions, tell him what he wants to know Of course, they don’t want to know anything, they want several years of emails so they can cherry pick them and smear a public scientist. I have no research funding from those companies, never did, probably never will. I live in a largely non-GMO state (we grow hort crops mostly) and those co’s don’t have much interest in that stuff.

    Sure, companies of all stripes have historically sponsored research at every university. That does not mean anything other than some researcher received a few shekels to get some work done. And yes, Monsanto kindly provided funds to open a professor position, and that’s a good thing. Is all of the work in organic and sustainable agriculture in my department also invalid? (we have some of the best researchers in the world in this area BTW…)

    I’ve never said I was an agronomist. What are your credentials in ag?

    I’m just a blue-collar suburb-a-billy that studied science, didn’t want to work in the corporate world, and enjoys teaching. I’m grateful to be able to do that. I’m glad to do research that helps farmers and the environment, and expands science. Do you know my research? You might like what you see.

    I also appreciate GMO Answers very much. I used to answer 1-2 hours of emails a night for people asking questions about GMO. Now I just answer them there. It makes teaching about science easier. I’ve never been compensated or told what to post– that’s insane. Nobody tells me what to do.

    So the hatchet job on public scientists continues. I’m a little bit grateful for that because it adds another few pages to the book that will be published in 10 years, showing how scientists that reached out to the public were attacked, simply for teaching science. It is a modern McCarthy-level witch hunt, and while sad, it is the normal growing pains of trying to teach what others don’t want to learn. Best wishes to you.

    Comment by kevinfolta — February 18, 2015 @ 6:32 am

    • Of course you claim to be an agronomist, along with a political scientist, sociologist, economist, etc. Otherwise what would be the intellectual basis of your pontifications about the deployment of GMOs? Remember, it’s your crew which insists no one has a right to any opinion regarding any subject where they lack the credential. We’ve seen you frothing everywhere about agronomy, about human medicine, the list goes on, as I detailed above. You’re a propagandist with the motives and ethics of any other propagandist. As for your university, the nauseating list of “Gold Level Donors” I linked speaks for itself.

      Are the organic researchers you mention here the same ones you consistently lie about in the media?

      And if you’re not following the party line, why are your lies the same canned lies the rest of the hacks spew?

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 10:06 am

  6. Glad to see what Beth Hoffman is writing

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/bethhoffman/2013/08/26/why-genetically-modifying-food-is-a-bad-idea/

    Comment by Brooks Anderson — February 18, 2015 @ 11:03 am

    • That one’s pretty good. I’ve seen it before.

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 1:56 pm

  7. Regarding the idea of people with establishment credentials being the only ones allowed in the debate, always remember that NONE of these people are experts on plants. Do any of them know how to make a plant? Or even one cell of a plant? They have no idea. Don’t be fooled by their terminology and arrogance.

    They are monkeying around with plants in ways that have never been done before, I think anyone would agree on that. They have no idea what the consequences of this might be, no matter what they claim. It’s not their job to do this, they do not have the wisdom for it. And any thinking person knows the real primary motivation for GMOs is so a group of sleazy corporations can make royalties off the foods that used to be everyone’s birthright. People need to focus on recovering the rich diversity of foods that used to keep people healthy around the planet. Contrary to what is taught in the establishment school system, people in the past were much healthier and longer lived than people today, and were expert on feeding themselves. The pictures taken around the world in the 1930s, showing more isolated cultures, as shown in Nutrition and Physical Degeneration by Weston Price, clearly show this.

    We see the same pattern with the pharmaceutical cartel, altering plant compounds so they can get patents, while the establishment actively suppresses knowledge of the original ancient medicines that have stood the test of time. I recall one medical doctor’s talk about how he traveled the world looking for alternative treatments for cancer, and having found many the are safer, more effective, and far less expensive than what is promoted in medical school, when he used these he was attacked and brought before medical boards and fined. People would not believe what goes on behind the scenes to suppress anything that threatens the big money interests that control this planet.

    See my first comment on this article, above, citing that video that is a good intro into this whole subject. Most people in academia are absolutely clueless about the bigger picture, and btw the bigger picture involves a lot more than money, but following the money gets people headed in the correct direction.

    Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 18, 2015 @ 3:00 pm

    • It’s indisputable that they lack the wisdom for it. That’s been pretty much the story of modern fossil-fuel based technology, and the use of fossil fuels themselves – this primate is very good with tools, but extremely stupid, or perhaps mentally ill, where it comes to what we call wisdom.

      And you’re right about the Big Lie, so essential to the pro-GM activists, that genetic engineering is the same as conventional breeding. Breeding works with whole genomes among related species only (and no mutation-mongering tissue culture). Risks are rare and predictable, and can occur only in a few scenarios. GE is qualitatively different in that the possible range of transgenic insertions is indefinitely greater than the genetic transfer possible in breeding, or in nature. With GE the potential for harmful chaotic effects is vastly greater and completely unpredictable. Every genetically engineered genome which has been independently studied has displayed the complete mess left behind by the “event”. Submissions to regulators detailing the alleged genome of the GMO are mystical fictions which have no relationship to the unpredictably messy reality.

      As for natural mutations and unpredicted effects of conventional breeding, which the GE activists claim means GE is the same as these processes, where these happen they happen locally. They run up against naturally evolved safeguards versus mutation, and such changes would need time and effort to run a gamut of naturally imposed challenges, or the challenges of breeder selection, to become established. GE, on the contrary, aggressively seeks to override these safeguards and leap over these challenges. It seeks to deploy the infected genome in the environment over vast regions as fast as it can. This is such a difference of magnitude, speed, and geographical reach as to comprise a qualitative difference.

      Nassim Taleb recently co-authored a paper on this systemic risk aspect of genetic engineering. It has zero in common with conventional breeding, physically or ecologically. Here we deal with a phenomenon where politics and economics melds inextricably with ecology. Ecologists are really the only scientists fully qualified to speak about GMOs. Beyond that they’re fundamentally a political and economic phenomenon. They have almost zero to do with science, which renders it all the more ironic when these morons go on shrieking “anti-science! anti-science!” They really are the most stupid, ignorant cretins out there.

      http://gmwatch.org/index.php/news/archive/2014/15626-ruin-is-forever-why-gmos-should-be-banned-on-the-basis-of-the-precautionary-principle

      Comment by Russ — February 18, 2015 @ 3:40 pm

  8. Awwww, poor Kevin. People like us beating up on those scientists 🙂 Hey, if anyone has anything good to say about Monsanto, I’m automatically assuming they’re on the payroll. Poison company messing with food? Kevin, hate to tell you-we’re not stupid.

    Comment by DualPersonality — February 19, 2015 @ 3:04 am

    • Yes, such confident words, so why the contradictory, self-pitying whining about “McCarthyism”? Folta probably doesn’t pose as a historian (his kind wants to wipe out even the thought of history, since knowledge of history is the deadly enemy of all corporatists and technocrats), but he sure knows as little about history as he does about anything else.

      (If he actually believes the canned lies he constantly regurgitates, then I doubt he could pass a grade school level quiz even about GMOs, let alone about any of the other subjects he spews upon. He’s an ignorant rube, as is every other STEM myopic.)

      McCarthy was part of the power structure, as is the GMO establishment. McCarthy kicked down. He was a cowardly bully who persecuted those weaker, as do the pro-GMO activists, who have always acted far more like a shrieking mob than like anyone who has a rational point to make. We can ask Arpad Pusztai, or Ignacio Chapela, or Seralini, or Tyrone Hayes, or any of a long list of real scientists, about McCarthyism. We sure can’t ask mercenary hacks like Folta, so comfortably ensconced within the corporate power structure and paid through corporate welfare. (There’s not an organization on that “Gold Level” list which isn’t a parasite dependent on corporate welfare, and which wouldn’t collapse tomorrow without it.)

      Folta and his crew are the exact same “scientists” who assured us eugenics was the core truth of human experience (ideologically and institutionally, genetic engineers are the direct descendants of the racist eugenicists, and they still believe in it, though few have had the guts to come out of that closet yet), that cigarette smoking was safe and beneficial, same for asbestos, PCBs, DDT, dioxin, BPA, and so on. In every case the Foltas did the exact same thing they do with GMOs – parrot the corporate party line and attack anyone who looks at the evidence, or who simply uses common sense, as being “anti-science”. But of course no ideology has ever been as anti-rational and anti-scientific as modern corporate scientism, which is the core ideology of these hacks.

      Their pusillanimous whining just goes to show they’re not only bullies but whiny, cowardly bullies. Let them come back and tell us about McCarthyism when their big money poison machine is no longer in control, and when it’s legitimate scientists who get all the respect and funding while poison peddlers* like them are out on the street and reviled by all decent human beings.

      Why so afraid? Why such hysteria among them at the sight of even the most modest questioning or criticism of GMOs? It’s because they know the facts are 100% against them, that they have nothing but lies and brute force propping up their malign project, and that the lies aren’t working. They’re scared to find out what’s going to happen once they have to rely 100% on force.

      *In the end, Kevin Folta and his like are nothing but crooked salesmen of Roundup and concentrated Bt insecticide.

      Comment by Russ — February 19, 2015 @ 4:43 am

  9. Tom M., I’m sorry to hear about the community plan not working out. I’ve thought about how great it would be to do something like that. Would I be nosey if I ask what happened?

    Comment by DualPersonality — February 19, 2015 @ 3:15 am

    • I first tried my community project about 10 years ago, and retried it 3 years ago. I met some special people in the process, but never came close to finding the 25 people I was looking for.

      The idea was based on experiences I’ve had in life, and particularly things I learned at meetings I was invited to over a three year period, with one of the last groups of traditional Natives still living in this country. These Everglades Indians, who still live in community, shared some priceless info with me and others, at these weekend gatherings camping out in natural areas, and at environmental events. Listening is a big part of their culture, and I and others shared info with them as well.

      We live in a sophisticated global slave prison (that’s not an analogy btw). They are using the “divide and conquer” strategy on us, in every way they can think of. People live in “single family homes” cut off from Nature, cut off from community, where a tv broadcasts Big brother propaganda into their minds daily. Children are taken to prisons called “schools”, where Big brother tells them what to think and punishes them if they think for themselves or act on their own feelings. Things that used to be free for everyone, energy, food, housing, … now people must pay for them, usually by working for hierarchal Big Brother organizations like corporations and governments. Religious ideas are broadcast into children’s minds at Big Brother rituals, and these programs usually continue for a lifetime. Young adults, age 12-17, are now called children and have to hang out a shopping malls to have any sense of community and their own space… I could go on and on.

      My community was a stepping stone idea, to return to a natural human society. The idea was to find 25 people to each “buy” five acres of Mother Earth, preferably adjoining an existing natural or somewhat natural area. This would give us almost a half mile by half mile of land. People would keep individual title to their five acres so if they leave they could sell to another. But most of the land would be preserved, and each would have right of trespass thru everyone’s preserve, which could be set up as contiguous. People could farm together, have orchards, dairy, grazing, … as makes sense. There would be a community area for a kitchen, gym, library, bathhouse, clubhouse geared toward art, music, dance, drumming, etc. Similar to how condominium associations have group areas and yet each member owns their own condo, but extending the idea much further.

      My idea was to be completely off the grid. Each member would really only need a simple cabin/cottage, because cooking, bathing, etc. could be done in the community areas,

      Preserving most of the land ie respecting the other life forms and Mother Earth, is considered radical today, and some of my ideas would be considered even more radical to today’s robots. I don’t believe our species is obscene, and so people would be free to dress or undress as they please. Yes even children would be free to see their own species touching. OMG.

      One of the key things I learned from the Everglades Natives is that in their culture (what’s left of it), it is the woman’s brother that is considered the male guardian of her children, not the biological father. As I explored this idea and recalled anthropological research such as the 1929 book, The Sexual Life of Savages, about a free love society in the Pacific, where it is the woman’s brother that is the male guardian of her children, then the light bulb went on. How could things be different if we lived in a free society? Who would know who the biological father of any particular child was? And how is a male supposed to care for his biological offspring in a free society, even if the tribe had DNA testing or whatnot? They would be scattered about, coming into this world thru various women.

      I had discovered one of the establishment’s best kept secrets: the matrilineal family structure. I am confident this basic structure was in fact the most common form of “family” in antiquity. You lived with your blood kin on your mother’s side (her brothers and sisters, her mother and mother’s brothers and sisters, your sister’s kids, etc.), and families stabilized at about 25 people. There were no fathers or spouses. This matrilineal family structure was the basic building block of society, you had one family name from cradle to grave, no divorce, no broken homes, no child abuse as you have a group of adults around the kids. Your love life doesn’t affect family. 25 or so families would make up a “village”, and 25 or so villages would have a central “city” they linked to. This basic pattern of villages and cities is still found in one of the last places on Mother Earth that still has some significant natural areas remaining, Papua New Guinea. And the matrilineal free love family structure can still be found in isolated pockets, such as the Mosuo people of China. Of course these societies have been under attack for a long time.

      The last thing the establishment wants is people returning to real community, where you learn by direct experience, and from listening to, discussing, debating… with people you know. Where everyone has a voice at the circle.

      I should add, the community idea was to be in the country, within bicycling distance (say 30 miles) of a town, or farther, perhaps using a wood burning school bus we could convert and run off fallen limbs and dead trees from our nature preserve (the technology is actually very old for this). We could commute the bus to town twice a week, so people can live part time in town and part time at the country community. Bridging the two worlds. In the past people did live with one foot in each world, although a “city” was a festival center, not a wage-slave center as is found today.

      Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 19, 2015 @ 11:15 am

      • To clarify, where I referred to religion above, I meant Big Brother religion. Big Brother loves to play the “heads they win tails you lose” game. (Are you a Republican or a Democrat? ie should we go to war today, or should we wait and go to war tomorrow?

        Do you believe in God or are you an atheist? ie do you believe the Creator is a crazed being that throws people in an eternal hell for being healthy (such as having sexual desire), or do you believe the Universe is a pointless random event? Well, which one?

        Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 19, 2015 @ 11:28 am

      • Earlier I said how good things came out of my experiences on the land I have in Florida. Maybe some people would find this of interest:

        When I couldn’t find people to join me in a community, I had to keep things moving so ended up getting five acres, mostly wooded, which border a five by five mile “wildlife mgmt area”. I lived alone in a tent for two years. I had a farmer as a neighbor and a few other people but rarely interacted with them. I had only a bicycle for travel. The nearest town was 12 miles. Gainesville, the “big city”, was 45 miles. So it really was a Henry David Thoreau Walden Pond type of experience (not that I’ve read the book).

        I had never planned to do that for that long, but that’s how it worked out. While out there so close to nature, I learned many things, and had messages come to me. These messages tie in with research I have done on the side over the last 20 years. I’ve written up a boiled down version of my findings and posted it online in 14 parts plus follow up posts in a forum.

        “Messages” are a key part of Native American culture, and native cultures around the world, but this facet of science is denied by the establishment. It has been pointed out in this forum here we must differentiate between real science and Big Brother science. All I will say here is that for anyone that has the courage and perseverance to actually directly investigate ideas found in Native cultures re the spirit realm and other areas called “folklore” and “superstition” by establishment science, you will find that it is in fact the establishment science that is fictional.

        Last year a woman at the raw milk forum I met Russ through asked me if I had any stories for her own forum, called “thepolkadotapron.freeforums”. (Add dot org to that.) So I started sending her my stories. These are non fiction, and are unlike any established version of history or religion. My thread is called “The Noah’s Ark/Arc Code”. It should be on page 1 or 2 of the “Pull Up A Chair” section of that forum.

        If you only read Part 1, which isn’t long, and have a globe handy and compass and string, you will see there is a huge message drawn on Europe, exactly aligned with the last of the 7 Wonders of the World, the Great Pyramids. Nobody noticed this message until me, it’s right under everyone’s noses. I explain how that came about and at least part of the meaning in Part 1. Anyone who wants to open their eyes and look can verify this message is sitting right there. It could be a deception, it could be real, but it cannot be a random event. Give it a spin if you have some time to read.

        Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 19, 2015 @ 10:45 pm

      • Tom, I would like that kind of society too, but your failure to find even 25 people who’d fit it should tell you something. When we got agriculture, something that previously only ants had, we started the long painful process of converting an ape into an ant (you are what you eat–and how you get it!) Guess we’re round about halfway now. We could have had that kind of life any time before about 10,000 BC–not any more. Btw, you should know Margaret Mead’s stuff has been exposed–she was a gullible girl then and some naughty Samoan girls of a similar age told her what she wanted to hear.

        Comment by Derek Bickerton — February 22, 2015 @ 5:13 pm

      • “…We could have had that kind of life any time before about 10,000 BC–not any more. Btw, you should know Margaret Mead’s stuff has been exposed–she was a gullible girl then and some naughty Samoan girls of a similar age told her what she wanted to hear.”

        Actually if you do some digging you’ll find a lot of evidence for this kind of life style right up to the present. Digging thru the huge U of F library, I found anthropologists’ accounts of the sexually free Polynesians in the 20th century (Max Freedom Long’s writings from Hawaii show the same thing), sexually free Indians in the American Southwest up to the 1950s, I mentioned the Mosuo people of China today, the Trobiander Islanders, look into all the erotic artifacts indicating sexually free societies in the Inca region of South America, that have been suppressed by museums, same thing is found with the “secret rooms” in British and Italian museums, etc., hiding and destroying artifacts showing the sexually free societies of Pompey, the Roman world, and elsewhere…

        I doubt Margaret Mead thinks her research has been “exposed”. It fits well with plenty of other researchers into Polynesia. All independent researchers that find things that don’t fit with establishment dogma have their research “exposed”. See for example Wikipedia’s account of Weston Price, the dentist that traveled the world in the 1930s documenting the superb health of peoples not eating the “modern diet” of refined sugar, etc. Wikipedia uses the phrase, “the myth of the healthy savage”. Yet if you actually read Price’s book, you find an introduction by a Harvard anthropologist of the 1930s, talking about how it was common knowledge then that “savages” are so healthy. Price has tons of pictures he took around the world supporting this. And these people had greatly varied diets, some were agriculturalists, some hunter gatherers, etc.

        I do agree it could be difficult to have this kind of society today, not because of ants, but because of attacks by governments, paramilitary groups, missionaries, corporate loggers, industrial poisoners, scam wars, etc.

        Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 22, 2015 @ 6:35 pm

  10. Really interesting stuff, Tom. Your breakdown of schools is spot-on, and one of many reasons I homeschool. When I hear the ranting about unvaxxed kids being in the system schools, I think to myself “Is going to that place worth compromising your principles? I mean, people are afraid the schools will force them to have their kid vaxxed. Isn’t that the big loud, unignorable sign you probably shouldn’t have them there in the first place? The type of community you describe brings to mind some thoughts I’ve had recently, especially those relating to cooperative child-rearing and elimination of rigid domestic and marital arrangements. We’ve pretty much been told that all children need is 2 parents, but I believe in the idea of a village raising children. Not that stupid Clinton version of it, but everyone loving and looking after all the children as though they were their biological offspring.We’ve also been told that polyamorous adults can’t be good or attentive parents, which I’ve concluded to be untrue. Obviously, there’s far more to your community than simply that-that part just happened to remind me of what I’ve been contemplating. Wow, 2 years of tent living! I assume the temperature there is fairly comfortable? What are you looking to do next?

    Comment by DualPersonality — February 20, 2015 @ 2:30 am

    • Yeah stay away from vaccines. All my nieces and nephews have weird breathing problems and food allergies we never had. Reading comments by farmers and nurses at Gumpert’s raw milk blog gave me the answer: all these weird vaccines they force on the kids. Peanut allergies are epidemic now, kids go into shock, yet they were unknown not long ago. Peanut oil goes into vaccines… I like to cite that book, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration, it debunks most of your formal education right there. People who ate their whole food diets were immune to things like tuberculosis, which was epidemic in the 1930s when Weston Price traveled the world documenting the superb health of peoples outside the global system.

      On the land I didn’t even have a well (ground water is 70 degrees year round there) but captured rain water into a tub and it kept me cool. The “4 Rules of Cool” I came up with: Shade, Breeze, Nakedness, and Agua. You can also use your mind to heat or cool yourself. Just realizing your system has the ability to adjust to a wide range of temperatures, like animals do, can help your system function better.

      Comedy ideas used to come to me too out on the land (picture hearing a guy alone in the woods laughing hysterically in the middle of the night), so I made a full length comedy movie starring me and my sister and her boyfriend. The dvd is still at the indy library in Gainesville, Civic Media Center. It was about the global prison, but in comic form, that’s how it came to me to do it, I had a website, gave out like 15 copies to special people I know, and left it up to them if they wanted to share it, they never did so I let it die on the vine. I think it called into question too many of their beliefs. But to me it’s funny, I’ve watched it like 15 times (is that normal?).

      My current project is “The Clocksmiths”, a band I am trying to form. I have recovered what I believe are the musical tunings used in antiquity. Music today is blurry. In the past it was based on the laws of harmonics, giving you all these different musical keys, each with their own flavor. Also you can find ancient Roman harpsichords, for example, reconstructions, that play 19 notes per octave instead of 12. I’ve recovered how they were tuned. Putting music back in tune has tremendous potential for healing, because our systems vibrate, based on the same laws of harmonics as real music. Not too many musicians have been interested in these tunings so far, but it’s come to me to form this band, the idea is to create shows from the ground up. locally, by renting ballrooms, gyms, etc. , and playing three hours of original music that gets people dancing, open to all ages. We’d be dressed in medieval garb and I’ll paint castles and stone structures and sacred geometry to project onto the dark walls. Just like what I wrote earlier, with music today it’s mostly people sitting on their asses while a small group does everything, it used to be everyone was in the show, so that’s the idea, to get people’s bodies moving. I think it would be tremendously healing and fun as well. It’s based on drumming rhythms. I’m trying to make a couple oak barrels into drums. I’ve also designed musical instruments to play these ancient tunings, and bought software and a digital piano so I can retune it. It’s probably a longer term project.

      Comment by Tom M Culhane — February 20, 2015 @ 10:24 am

  11. Russ, what an honor to hear lying directly from Mr. Folta’s mouth! I think they’re starting to listen and realize that everyone is not comatose. Keep up the good work!

    Comment by DualPersonality — February 20, 2015 @ 2:34 am

    • Thanks DP.

      Comment by Russ — February 20, 2015 @ 3:13 am

  12. […] was actually written by a Dow/Syngenta activist who was too stupid not to put her real name on it. As usual it’s someone with zero medical credentials expressing ignorant opinions on human medicine and […]

    Pingback by GMO News Report, February 27th 2015 | Volatility — February 27, 2015 @ 3:52 am

  13. […] pro-GMO activists ensconced in academia, in the course of citing these as typical examples of how the pro-GM activists consistently impersonate various kinds of scientists and other professionals even as they hypocritically insist that GM critics have no standing to opine unless they possess […]

    Pingback by Pro-GMO Activists, the Various Climate Change Lies, and the Mainstream Media | Volatility — March 14, 2015 @ 8:49 am

  14. […] that by now it must require extraordinary evidence for a pro-GM contention to get a hearing. Here, as with credentialism, I propose we hold the pro-GMO activists to their own proclaimed standard.) . *Under the corporate […]

    Pingback by The Abdication of Establishment Science | Volatility — August 2, 2015 @ 3:14 pm

  15. […] the yearly list. #1 this year was 2015’s demolition of the fraudulent pro-GM propagandists, “By Their Own Standard Credentialist Pro-GMO Activists Are Ignorant Yahoos”. This got so many hits because it was featured by GMWatch and from there reblogged at several other […]

    Pingback by The 2015 Blogging Year, and An American Revolution Reprise | Volatility — December 31, 2015 @ 6:43 am

  16. […] goes, it’s always the pro-poison activists who want to have a fraudulent “vote” (but only among “officially” credentialed charlatans and idiots), who make a fetish of phony numbers, who lie incessantly about the non-existent […]

    Pingback by Europe’s Horsemen of the Roundup | Volatility — January 3, 2016 @ 4:50 am

  17. Reblogged this on Ban GMOs Now Blog and commented:
    Excerpt:
    “By their own standard they have no standing or right to make the vast majority of their assertions and comments. We must hold them to their own standard and reject out of hand anything any of them says which isn’t firmly within the bounds of their formally credentialed discipline.”

    Comment by Jeff Kirkpatrick — January 24, 2016 @ 11:34 am

  18. […] doesn’t make a deal with BASF or something similar they might be in deep trouble. . *One of my four featured yahoos who impersonate scientists is still at it. More detail on Bruce Chassy’s ongoing career as a mercenary fraud. In spite […]

    Pingback by GMO News Summary, February 5th 2016 | Volatility — February 5, 2016 @ 5:17 am

  19. […] might want to peruse this entertaining take-down of pro-GMO activist-scientists who seem to think they are experts on everything. The author […]

    Pingback by Inside the Church of the Pro-GMO Activist — February 27, 2016 @ 7:34 pm

  20. […] might want to peruse this entertaining take-down of pro-GMO activist-scientists who seem to think they are experts on everything. The author […]

    Pingback by Genetic Engineering, Twisted Science, Altered Truth. Inside the Church of Pro-GMO Activism - The True News — February 28, 2016 @ 4:58 am

  21. […] might want to peruse this entertaining take-down of pro-GMO activist-scientists that seem to believe they are experts on everything. The author […]

    Pingback by Genetic Engineering, Twisted Science, Altered Truth. Inside the Church of Pro-GMO Activism – Center for Research on Globalization | Online News of The World — February 28, 2016 @ 5:17 am

  22. […] might want to peruse this entertaining take-down of pro-GMO activist-scientists that seem to believe they are experts on everything. The author […]

    Pingback by Genetic Engineering, Twisted Science, Altered Truth. Inside the Church of Pro-GMO Activism – Center for Research on Globalization | Today News Update — February 28, 2016 @ 5:28 am

  23. […] might want to peruse this entertaining take-down of pro-GMO activist-scientists that seem to believe they are experts on everything. The author […]

    Pingback by Genetic Engineering, Twisted Science, Altered Truth. Inside the Church of Pro-GMO Activism – Center for Research on Globalization | Only Share News of the World — February 28, 2016 @ 6:22 am


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: