On Tuesday, February 10, 2015 at 12:40:25 PM UTC-5, net cop wrote:
"Mayayana" writes:
| | Obviously your statement is false. In fact, in the context
| | you've used the words, the 2 things are opposites.
| |
|
| You're demonstrating my point. For you, science
| absolutely cannot be questioned. It's objective
| fact.
|
| Oh really,
| and you know that how?
|
You just told me. You say science is the opposite
of religion. That's a dogmatic statement,
No it's not.
I just gave you the reasoning behind my statement.
Can you recall where I mentioned an approach to EVIDENCE?
There's no dogma there at all.
As I said, scientists, and those that take a scientific
approach, (as opposed to a DOGMATIC approach) question
everything based on EVIDENCE.
Once again Dan, of course you're right.
(Sorry, but I feel the need to capitalize the words you
appear to not notice or understand.)
...snip barrage of words meant to obfuscate.
| Science is all about questioning.
| Collect evidence, come to your best conclusion.
| QUESTIONING is an essential part of the process.
|
| Unlike it's opposite.
|
OK. Then why didn't you question the Oklahoma
study? And what are your evidence and conclusions
about GMOs and organic food? I'm not asking you to
discuss religion here. I'm only questioning the limits
of science and alleged science. Isn't that allowed as
a topic of scientific inquiry? Shouldn't we be able to
discuss something like GMOs and organic food as a
scientific topic?
You appear to have me confused with someone else.
Let's see Oklahoma GMO study...maybe this:
http://canola.okstate.edu/gmofacts
I don't know what "study" M's referring to either. All
I saw was a reference to a "survey". But I guess anyone who's
as confused as M is doesn't understand the difference between
an actual scientific study and a consumer survey. Good grief.
BTW, I'm still waiting for M to show me where Monsanto forced
farmers to use their seed. Or sued farmers where their non-GMO crop
was innocently contaminated by some Monsanto seed from a nearby farm
that was using it.
So, what are my choices? Believe you or a study
that seems to be citing some numbers:
In the U.S. approximately 57% of all soybeans cultivated in 1999 were
genetically-modified, up from 42% in 1998 and only 7% in 1996.
So far, I think I'm going with the study.
You don't seem to be able to tell the difference between a belief
and a conclusion drawn from evidence.
As far as GMOs vs Organic (which I have not commented on
up to this point), I prefer not to worry. I think I'll live
longer not being afraid of everything.
I eat what I like.
I believe I preserve my health through activity,
not fear of what I eat.
--
Dan Espen
+1