Comments by "N Marbletoe" (@nmarbletoe8210) on "Watch this 14 Year Old GMO Activist Smackdown This Bullying 'Shark Tank' Entrepreneur" video.

  1. keenanleetodd David Adcock you're both wrong. It's not GMO that is safe or unsafe -- it is how it is used.
    2
  2. UltimateReaperStudio there may be hope for cats
    2
  3. keenanleetodd yah, ya know what? it does depend on how a gun is used. so thx for proving me right about GMO also. ironically i'm mostly anti-GMO because of how it's being used. where's the golden rice? where's the tomatoes that know when to come in from the cold?? all i see is corn with poison, cotton with poison, bleh. i really really really want to see endangered species being helped with GMO. as far as food, i like organic and wild.
    1
  4. keenanleetodd two good reasons why i'm against GMO as currently deployed.   the scientific point i'm making is that GMO could be good; golden rice i see no problem with; they could engineer endangered species to save them and things like that. instead we have insane corporations experimenting with our health and ecosystem on a worldwide scale, like you're saying.
    1
  5. geld213 a corn plant not produce corn? the corn is the seed. but i agree a GMO need not produce seed; bananas don't, some watermelons don't...
    1
  6. David Adcock right, just agreeing that it's possible for a crop to not have seed, GMO or not. but what about the corn? are you saying that it had no seed??
    1
  7. Isaac Gordon here's the problem with your statement "concluded that GMOs are perfectly safe." There's no such thing as GMO -- it is many things.   I'm sure what you mean is "that GMOs in production today are perfectly safe." But it's a real problem to defend "GMO" or attack "GMO" per se. We should simply be very careful with it, because it's going to be used, and it's a very powerful technique unlike anything every seen on earth.
    1
  8. Isaac Gordon Fired! Position Available: Safety Engineer, El Corp Inc. GMO division. Requires accident avoidance training and high motivation to preserve public safety and acceptance of new technologies.
    1
  9. Isaac Gordon nah, i was saying that if we get the attitude "It won't just happen by accident" then it's probably going to happen by accident.
    1
  10. Isaac Gordon 'the messing up' is most likely after the release of a product -- unintended consequences. you saying that has never happened in genetic engineering? not so impressed by the "YEARS" -- nature does millions of years of testing and development.
    1
  11. N Marbletoe agree the technical aspects are well done. still, the genome is not fully understood, not by a loooong way. if you change something that you don't understand, surprises are guaranteed.
    1
  12. Kyle Price there are many ingredients on labels today that have no known harmful effect. it's people's right to know, if they really want to know. that's democracy and the free and informed market. i don't like the idea of labeling with "GMO" -- i want to know what the modification was. "Salmon engineered with cod growth hormone." or "rice engineered with vitamin A gene from collard greens." The GMO technique is not harmful; the actual products could be healthy, neutral, allergy producing, or even have religious issues.
    1
  13. Kyle Price Riddle me this: if i spliced a peanut protein gene into a turkey, you sayen that peanut protein could not be an allergen even if it IS an allergen when it's in a peanut? wtf. explain the magic. Religious issues... if i spliced a gene for satanism into a unicorn, you saying that a Christian would have no problem growing and eating that unicorn?
    1