We all knew the signs at the science march wouldn't disappoint

Apr 22, 2017 10:16 PM

prncessbuttrcup

Views

552150

Likes

17629

Dislikes

589

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL!
Let's keep funding awesome science!! https://experiment.com/

Some good signs, but I'm betting there were a lot of scientific illiteracy and "science fanboys" with more enthusiasm than facts there. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 3

2/2 Not trying to be a dick, but sometimes that's just the opposite end of scientific ignorance and doesn;t help much more. Looked fun tho!

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Time to pose my favorite gif again.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 6

Always bothers me how horrible a font choice that is whenever I see that pic

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Yeah it is pretty crappy lol

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Anyone ever try to play a Civ game with bad science? It doesn't end well...

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Who needs science when you can rush em early? Mongolia 4 lyf

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Haha, civ 4! if you could survive against the Mongolians long enough to get Iron working they were toast, that early warrior rush was brutal

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Some men just want to watch the world learn.

9 years ago | Likes 49 Dislikes 4

Got Polio? Me neither, thanks science lol

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

Ah, I was looking for this.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 513 Dislikes 4

I am disappointed that I haven't seen this sign. This would have been my sign.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bitch.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Yeah but Earth's climate will change regardless of what we do and will continue to do so after we are long gone.. its in the geologic record

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Nowhere remotely close to the changes that have been occurring over the past 200 years.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

MAKE AMERICA THINK AGAIN! IN PEER REVIEW WE TRUST!

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 4

I've wondered about that. Just wondered. About some of the inherent flaws that come with "peer reviewed material".

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I really like "Make America Think Again." I want it on a tshirt

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL

9 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 13

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 5

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL BILL!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yeaaaa Science!

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 5

Woo!!! Wish I would have gone today but I couldn't get my lazy ass out of bed.

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

I'm not arguing with her, but there was once a very similar statistic to that of #2 stating the safety of lead.

9 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 3

I am arguing with her because that 97% number is 100% bullshit

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 6

Yep, closer to 99% when looking at peer-reviewed, published work.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

Well, yes, but I was worried that stating that fact would get me downvoted to oblivion.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

naw man, leftists agenda was pushed too hard. they overplayed their hand and now most people are pretty much down to kill commies 'n 'shit

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

#13 did that protester just assume the Earth's Gender??

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

Damn, you know it's bad when even the Ents are finally showing up for you.

9 years ago | Likes 58 Dislikes 1

The Entmoot takes a long time.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

I just don't understand how you can say "save the trees" on a sign made of cardboard.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

So you'd rather write in stone?

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

I was thinking maybe paint their message on their tummies. Maybe RECYCLE something into a sign. Anything. But having a tree hold a sign?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Funny...that seems smart. "Keep killing trees and we go back to painting rocks. You want that?" That's actually a great idea.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

They said they were going to make a demonstration for science. They got all the smart ass signs. I'm not disappointed.

9 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 4

I'm still not sure what they're protesting. Narratives and agendas are all over the place at these marches.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

If I get it correctly, the main theme of the protest is how anti-science position got so much traction in the current USA administration.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Outside of climate change, what anti-science are you talking about?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Isn't that enough? To me, this position signals that they'll undermine science whenever it's ideologically convenient for them...

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not really. Climate science is mutually exclusive from many fields and it more business related. That goes both ways for different fields.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That one Sir Mixalot sign holder is gonna be mortified when she's a teenager and suddenly gets all the lyrics.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Maybe, but that song and worse play throughout the day now, kids laugh about it, it's a different era?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Mortified or silently pleased? ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I liked some of these, I cringed at some too

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

STEM people don't usually get hired for their social skills.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

#6 discount nick cage?

9 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 0

Bit of a stretch.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Fun fact, that's picture was taken in Denver.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

yup

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I never knew what data looked like until I saw her poster!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

I'm sorry to hear that, probably a result or your underfunded school system.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Now I'm a believer.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The best one was in the background: "what do we want? Evidence based science. When do we want it? After peer review."

9 years ago | Likes 117 Dislikes 4

Ya beated me to it. Take it. TAKE IT, you magnificent bastard.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

but it's pretty old.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

an oldie but a goodie

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I loved that one, too

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

#2 to be fair, at one time 99.99% of surgeons ridiculed the idea of having to wash their hands befor surgery

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 5

Yes, but when presented with evidence to the contrary, they started washing their hands.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also, anyone who works in medicine knows that what is "fact" one year can lead to poor patient outcomes the next.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Science does not equal facts. Science leads to facts and the understanding there of. Equating the two is a falsity.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

And turns science into an almost religious faith.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

No, it just helps people to fuck up less at science

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But we've evolved.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Was there a genetic mutation that caused us to allow us to adapt and change our way of thinking. Proof or GtFO.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Maybe not genetic but psychological or social. Evolution isn't limited to dna; people also change.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not even remotely.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Totally unaware of what/why this is, anyone care to inform me?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

It was a nationwide march in support of science, because the Trump administration is anti-science.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 7

U kno that honestly doesn't surprise me

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Time for me to wear my fav shirt

9 years ago | Likes 132 Dislikes 3

I love it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i have this shirt! but without his face on it.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

And with "satan" instead of "sagan", and with a pentagram instead of a atom representation.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oh my! do you know if that shirt is avavible online? :)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

This!^

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The fact marches like these aren't dying down give me hope

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 6

Science does not equal facts. Science leads to facts and the understanding there of. Equating the two is a falsity.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

I wonder who's paying for all these protestors, they must be pretty rich. Wait I mean poor, the protests are tiny! /s

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

I dont know if global warming is true or not but what I do know is no group of americans will ever come to a 97% agreement on anything.

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 14

I think I was trying to point out how divided our society is. But yea, lets argue about climate change and politics. We'll figure it out.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

could be 47% of scientists in the US are foregners, so...

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

i

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You don't know if a sudden jump in CO2 emissions since the Industrial Revolution was OUR fault? Really?

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 6

And the statistic is not from the general population, it's from professionals that study climate change.

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 6

If I were a scientist being paid to support an ideal or not be paid for supporting the opposite...which would I choose?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

the problem is that the sign is not real. humans dont CAUSE climate change. otherwise it wouldnt have happened before. the thing is that 1/x

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 14

climate change has always happened since the earths existence. humans ACCELERATE climate change, which is correct and what scientists 2/x

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 8

say and think. there is a big difference between causing and accelerating something. and second of all, since a few hundred years 3/x

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 9

the actual warm period we are in right now shouldve been over and the next ice age should come. we are long overdue for that. (4/4)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 7

Statistically overdue.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Even for the internet this is the worst logic I have ever seen.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nonsense. If you want to talk semantics, "humans cause climate change" does not equate to "only humans cause climate change".

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 2

nope. when u get lung cancer, then start smoking and then say smoking caused ur lung cancers its just plain wrong. no semantics.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

False analogy fallacy. We didn't start polluting AFTER CO2 suddenly dramatically increased at an unnatural rate.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

So... how comes co2 level 200 million years ago was a lot higher than now?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Today's rate of increase is 200 times faster than the last sustained CO2 increase, in the mid to late Mesolithic.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

I remember in the Uk when our Doctors were protesting, the government tried to paint them as dangerous radicals. OUR FAMILY DOCTORS! 1.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

...You sure? I remember the government didn't want to give in to their demands, nobody ever thought they were radicals...

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I bet alot of your mainstream media does the same for your scientists 2.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Does anyone care that science doesn't work by consensus?

9 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 4

Most facts don't. The consensus is the kardashians suck. Does change the facts: they are richer than most of us.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well I'd argue if most scientists agree that's a pretty compelling idea obviously. And then you read up on it. And it's makes obvious sense.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Like geocentrism, phlogiston, and lamarckian evolution. Also, the classic example of Lysenkoism which enjoyed 100% acceptance in the CCCP.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

But, unfortunately, some of the funding for science does work by consensus, which is why it's important to have popular support. 1/2.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

Nevermind, I'm too tired to bother with the second half of my thought here. Enjoy your evening! 2/2.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

pls expln. am drunk

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

as scientists, we don't determine fact based on a show of hands.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Given how much people parrot "muh 97%", I'm going to go on a limb and say no. People care about their emotions, that's about it

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 8

That sign kinda bothered me. Climate change in general been happening for millions of years, we just caused the most recent blip, not all.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 6

That and as far as science is concerned there's always a debate to be had, even if the 97% stat were true

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 4

More like 75/77 scientists who were cherry picked believe humans cause "significant" (undefined in the survey) temperature rise. Not nearly

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 6

as impressive

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

I think the point is that 2 or 3 percent of corporate backed researchers denying the facts that have been proven doesn't mean there's debate

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

Implying the 97% is valid inherently. Anon plz

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

I saw a picture just now on IG, sign said : " I can't believe I have to protest for facts."

9 years ago | Likes 329 Dislikes 3

Whose facts? I'm sure Trump has a list of facts he'd like you to get behind.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 34

Then they're at the wrong march

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 85

9 years ago | Likes 41 Dislikes 3

How did you get so fucking ignorant to sarcasm?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 17

http://imgur.com/30qKJht

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

It's obvious his comment is sarcasm. How do you not understand what I said?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

How did everyone......

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 49

God damn, not sure why you're being downvoted, you're right. People are dumb and don't like science. FOR SCIENCE!!!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

What's an iverson?

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

What's a tungfu

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 8

+1 for Biglier

9 years ago | Likes 1609 Dislikes 16

Last photo: Just a Bill up on Capitol Hill.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's funny but like, he said big league...

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 8

Biglier is bettlier.

9 years ago | Likes 102 Dislikes 1

goodlier

9 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 0

Coollier

9 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

Awesomelier

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Big lier..

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

1) I hate Trump as much as the next semi-informed, anti-crazy human being. But if informed and not crazy is what we're claiming to be, it

9 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 13

2) should be common knowledge by now that A) bigly is a real word, and B) that's probably not what Trump was saying. There is plenty of

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 11

3) rancid hate-filled bile being spewed from that man's mouth every day. There's no need to use and reuse an old disproven grammar faux pas.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 11

oops facts are only aloud when it lets us laugh at the baddies.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

In a world of "on fleek", "bae" and so much more crazy slang, "biglier" just isn't that grammatically offensive to me anymore.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 3

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Apr 28, 2017 2:23 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Lie vs Lay used to be a grammar error. You can't say "language evolves" and then crap on "biglier" while defending popfad slang as new words

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Some grammar missing due to 140 character limit, don't you do it.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Is nobody saying something about "yuuuge"? As an non native speaker I understood it as a increasing joke. Please be gentle.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Donald Trump, controversial president of the USA, frequently pronounces the word "huge" as "yuge," for which he is regularly mocked.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Thank you for explaining!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I always thought he was saying 'big league', or maybe I was just hoping he wasn't dumb enough to say 'bigly' repeatedly.

9 years ago | Likes 41 Dislikes 2

His "Fact Check" team was even called Big League Truth. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/landing/rapid-response

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, he is that dumb.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 8

He started saying Bligly but changed it to Big League

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

(He was. It's just funnier to pretend he wasn't.)

9 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 4

He says big league, the guy's a cunt but he didn't say bigly

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 4

No, he definitely says bigly.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I heard a clear as day "G" after bigly both times, is he saying biglyg?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I've never heard a g afterward. It's "bigly" and "gyna." The dude can't even spell "tap," so what do you expect?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Second one doesn't make sense. Firstly, Evidence by Consensus is not Evidence. If I put out a survey asking "Are Frogs gay?" and 97% of-

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

-answers are 'Yes' then Frogs must be gay according to the sign's logic. Secondly, Humans don't cause Climate Change. Climate Change is-

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

a naturally occurring process that has been going on long before Humans were around. Humans have CONTRIBUTED to Climate Change, not started.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

If you need a cause to have an effect, then contribute = cause.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Finally, Climate Change IS still a debate. The consensus that we contribute to CC is overwhelming, but not the extent to which we do.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Quick reminder that DOW chemical is trying to get Trump and Pruitt to allow Organophosphate pesticides to be legal again. This class of (1)

9 years ago | Likes 908 Dislikes 12

Many sheepsss; the new generation of idiots (useful ones). The most disgusting: I support science, but also shitslam.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 8

Without the "global warming business" many will loose their jobs. WHY not improving the transportation system (or making it free) ?

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Post source.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Organophosphates are large class of chemicals. Malthion and Diazonon are problems due to poor application. Most have been supplanted by 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

by Carbamates

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'd comment about this, but I'd have to do it in other at least four languages to gather enough invective to do it justice.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Thought I was done being angry at unbelievably stupid bullshit today, then I read this.

9 years ago | Likes 102 Dislikes 3

I know how you feel

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

Many organophosphate are legal for ag uses. Are you talking about residential uses? Source?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

As someone who does herbicide application, Neonicatoids should be banned also. Agro industry needs to do things smarter. It's frustrating

9 years ago | Likes 120 Dislikes 4

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Apr 23, 2017 10:23 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Apr 23, 2017 10:32 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

9 years ago (deleted Apr 23, 2017 10:32 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

As long as it's "industry", it doesn't care. All that matters is the bottom line.

9 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 5

You're making a big generalization about a lot of people when you say that. As bad as saying all Native Americans are alcoholics.

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 23

I'm a native American and I'm an alcoholic.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Let's clarify a bit: mostly referring to the large corporations controlling majority of agro nowadays.

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 2

Everyone knows what you ment. Some people just can't help nitpick.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Given that modern 'industry' includes 'finance industry' and a focus on the profits first, I'd say it's a fair generalisation.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

Lots of Native Americans I know are alcoholics too... If you say "industry" does it, that kinda makes bad behavior average.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Neonics aren't the problem. Much like Dr. Wakefield and his bogus MMR-autism link, Chensheng Lu had his paper retracted. Link to follow (1)

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Um, we are all having a science boner here. Don't kill the mood with your facts.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Idk about you, but all this friendly debate strokes my science boner. Bonus strokes for each of them backing up the arguments!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

To start, this problem is bigger than just honey bees. Two, the source you posted seriously twists facts to promote the author's viewpoints

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Honey bees are not the only bee species, field study shows many native bees are severely affected by neonics at lower exposures

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Neonics are not the sole cause of bee decline, but they are a significant stressor on bee populations in addition to other stressors.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

the genetic literacy project is funded by monsanto, jon entine has no scientific backround, he's a paid shill

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Last February, the government of Australia, where neonics are used extensively, reaffirmed that "honeybee populations are not in decline (2)

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

despite the increased use of [neonicotinoids] in agriculture and horticulture since the mid-1990s." (3)

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Meanwhile mycologist Paul Stamets is working on a fungal solution to replace all toxic pesticides.....

9 years ago | Likes 37 Dislikes 1

Fungi are friend's AND food!

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Do you want the Last of Us? Because that's how you get The Last of Us.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Or the horrible fungaloids from whatever Whales ripped off when he made Cataclysm.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I wish we could favourite comments.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, an uncontrolled fungal infection on insects won't have any side effects.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

He has developed a way of preventing the fungi from reproducing. It protects the crops without seeding spores.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Life finds a way.gif

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I'm keeping an open mind that it works but this really does sound like the beginning of a sci fi disaster movie.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That's what I think every time I see one of those Boston dynamics robot gifs hah.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

About to go research Paul Stamets. Thank you

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

obligatory 'monsanto is the devil' comment

9 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 6

Monsanto's products aren't (necessarily) the evil. That said, their way of conducting their business can't be classified as anything else

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 1

nevermind the massive amount of incremental food that they have helped farms produce...

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 9

I'm allergic to incremental food

9 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Short term gain for long term pain ... think steroids.

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 5

Fun fact: Europe is managing perfectly fine without highly dangerous chemicals. Ours are just moderately dangerous.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Europe is a net importer of food, America is the world's bread basket

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

More due to land surface than pesticide use, imo. I'll look up the figures though.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just looked in detail, the Netherlands and belgium had around 9000 kg per hectare in 2014, which means the EU average is lowered by others

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just looked it up. EU produces around 6000 Kg of food per hectare, Us around 7000. So that's a slight improvement, at the cost of poison.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What I personally hope is that whatever fungal replacement is rumored to be in development requires chemicals to make that monsanto makes, 1

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There's ways to produce the same amount of food without the same poison, but those are more expensive.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Reminder that DOW created Agent Orange which still affects Vietnamese children to this day.

9 years ago | Likes 37 Dislikes 0

A few towns in Oregon used herbicides containing dioxin and miscarriages tripled!! FUCKING TRIPLED! 9/13 PREGNANCIES WERE MISCARRIAGES!

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Then Agent Orange entered the U.S. presidential election ー and to the great disgust and dismay of the rest of the world ー won.

9 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 0

Dioxin, which is found in Agent Orange, is so toxic that it's measured in trillionth of a gram. TRILLIONTH!

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

i used to work with dioxin!! INSTANT CANCER!!!

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"Trillionth is huge cuz of trillion, that means it's not toxic" - trump supporter

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Why is DOW(or Monsanto) to blame? The US military ordered them to manufacture it and even received a warning of the toxic contaminants. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Even the development of Agent Orange was made by US and British militaries.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Because if we blame the Govt, it will rest with JFK and LBJ. We can't have good democrats taking the blame.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

I don't think a party is to blame as it was in development since WWII hand through several administrations.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Agreed. However, if Vietnam war had started under a GOP prez, and expanded under another, if would obviously be GOP prez's fault. 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just like Bush is to be blamed for Iraq, but 'US', instead of Truman, is responsible for Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

pesticides inhibits human brain development and is toxic to 1800 endangered species as well. It also poisons workers.

9 years ago | Likes 739 Dislikes 9

You know, that stuff that works in the same way as sarine and VX.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But it's got what plants crave! It's got electrolytes!

9 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

Idiocracy right?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That movie gets scarier each year.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well isn't that what they want?? More imbeciles to support them?... I'd say they are strategically playing clever.

9 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

Along with elevated amounts of lead in the water this is a way to keep the GOP base growing.

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

tfw Trump wants his population to be dumb so he can be president forever

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's almost as if everything trump is doing is to damage and ultimately destroy the USA... Hmmm ho else wants that?

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

it would undo years of work to most bodies of water, too. RIP chesapeake bay

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Well at least we know this now. Remember how fantastic DDT was? Its still used in the 3rd world.

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Learned about organophosphates in my pharmacy schooling, nasty shit right there. We also learned we'd only see it in chemical warfare.

9 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

In a positive way, it's not carcinogenic?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

not really. But hits autonomic nervous system and can kill quickly if used as a weapon

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

VX, sarine and so on

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Didn't it pretty much blow up an entire plant in India too?

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Well the chemicals used in the production did. A pesticide that explodes on contact with water might not sell.

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

No, these were other substances, organophosphates only affect the nervous system directly.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Crap, is that VX?

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

VX is an organophosphate, yeah, but it wouldn't be used as a pesticide.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Bophal. That was quite a while ago, but still scary. I'd rather die by MOAB.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Let me guess- it's cheaper.

9 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 0

More toxic and damaging, the cheaper it is.

9 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Oh now that's just silly.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Think about it. What requires the least amount of effort: Carpet bomb a city into ruins or drop a nuke on it?

9 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

But... Think of all the jobs it will create! /s

9 years ago | Likes 132 Dislikes 2

The point of the pesticides is to need less workforce, thus using pesticides = less workers and more poisoned people in general :P

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

...For Oncologists

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Trump knows that the jobs he is creating are for the uneducated and lazy. The kind of people who will knock our country back 70 years.

9 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

And it is all part of trump and Putin's plan.

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Think of how many jobs will open up when all the workers somehow keep dying!

9 years ago | Likes 89 Dislikes 0

to be fair in the long run humans dying IS good for the enviroment

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Think of how much money corps will make if they insure the lives of them, hooray for dead peasants schemes!

9 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Learn how to lower the human population with this one weird trick! Scientists hate him!

9 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

Brawndo... It's what plants crave. It's got electrolytes.

9 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Turnover turnover turnover! It's what makes business boom!

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

/s ... does that mean sarcastic now?

9 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

Top spot brainy fella /s

9 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Just did a quick Wiki browse, "very highly acutely toxic to bees humans and wildlife" if it's got 3 adjectives describing its toxicity 1/2

9 years ago | Likes 304 Dislikes 0

In one sentence, probably shouldn't use it. 2/2

9 years ago | Likes 225 Dislikes 0

Nerve agents (G- and V-series) are organophosphates. Highly acutely toxic is a good description for them.

9 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

Now now, nerve agents is harsh, people might associate it with terrorism and our farmers killing workers with it is not terrorism. /s

9 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Unless the words are just LIES spread by BIG... uh... PLANET!

9 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 0

Actually "very" is an intensifier and "highly" and "acutely" are adverbs modfying "is" so 0 adjectives. I'll see myself out.

9 years ago | Likes 60 Dislikes 3

very is an adverb for highly, which is an adverb to acutely, which is an adverb for toxic, which is an adjective

9 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Adverb, I should've known.

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But 'toxic' is an adjective, so 1 adjective in that sentence

9 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 0

Very is definitely used as an adjective. There's no such thing as an intensifier.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Very is not an adjective. For example "This book I'm reading is very." is not a complete sentence.

9 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

its an adverb

9 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0