OMG - organisme modificate genetic: pro si contra

Invata engleza, o sa iti foloseasca in viata, eu n-am chef sa fac traduceri.

Tie clar nu ti-a folosit avand in vedere ce prostii conspirationiste citesti.

savantu, pe 08 februarie 2016 - 10:42, a scris:

"iti este clar" sau "ti-e clar" ! ...
no ofence ! ...

medelin992, pe 31 ianuarie 2016 - 00:18, a scris:

@medelin, aproape uitasem de tine ! ...
esti omu' care vrea ca viitorul sa fie GMO ! ... si 1/3 din populatia mondiala ! ...
nu ai pe nimeni drag care a murit de cancer ? ...
"cujeta" si cu inima ! ... ca "nu-i fi tanar si sanatos toata viata" !

Editat de abubue, 21 februarie 2016 - 23:40.

Frumoasa corelatia intre GMO si cancer.... sa fie pozitiva ori negativa?

FAOSTAT zice ca populatia tot creste, creste, creste...de bolnavi ce suntem...
Stii de ce se ard becurile noaptea? Pentru ca atunci sunt folosite cel mai des!

Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 1998 1000 5971882.83 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 1999 1000 6049205.20 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2000 1000 6126622.12 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2001 1000 6204310.74 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2002 1000 6282301.77 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2003 1000 6360764.68 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2004 1000 6439842.41 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2005 1000 6519635.85 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2006 1000 6600220.25 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2007 1000 6681607.32 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2008 1000 6763732.88 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2009 1000 6846479.52 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2010 1000 6929725.04 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2011 1000 7013427.05 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2012 1000 7097500.45 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2013 1000 7181715.14 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2014 1000 7265785.95 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision
Annual population World Total Population - Both sexes Population - Est. & Proj. 2015 1000 7349472.10 XU UNDESA, Population Division – World Population Prospects, the 2015 Revision

Editat de medelin992, 21 februarie 2016 - 23:52.

desi vb si scriu engleza din a.d. 1975, nu prea am inteles "graficul" tau ! ...
polpulatia mondiala creste din cauza ca noi oamenii suntem singurele fiinte
ale planetei Terra, la care nu "functioneaza" selectia naturala ! ...
yo aveam un coleg de clasa al carui tata "umbla" in carut de invalid ! ... il intrebam in clasa VIII-a
cum o "sexeaza" pe ma-sa ! ... ei bine, tatal acelui copil trebuia sa moara nu sa se reproduca ! ... intelegi ?
selectia trebuie sa o faca natura ! ... nu Monsanto ! ...
desi sunt de acord ca "cineva trebuie sa faca ceva " ! ...

Editat de abubue, 22 februarie 2016 - 00:11.

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

Mai greu, dar te-ai prins.

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

Pai si cancerele alea, ce sunt?

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

Nu.

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

Noi nu facem parte din natura?

pana la urma, "e greu cu tine" ! ...
yo unu' prefer varianta veche ! ... adica, sa ne omoram "cu razbel" ! ...
acu' avem arme care pot decima 80% din populatia mondila in cateva luni !
deoarece 80% din populatia mondiala traieste "la oras" ! ...

Editat de abubue, 22 februarie 2016 - 07:59.

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 07:57, a scris:

Hmmm?

Daca prin selectie naturala intelegi strict ce se intimpla in jungla, sigur ca la oameni nu prea e valabila, cu toate ca exista aceeasi tendinta, reprimata prin normele de convetuire sociala. Numai ca la oameni e alta selectie, dar tot selectie e, e jungla oamenilor.La animale e simplu, la oameni e mult mai complicat, dar e tot o selectie, tot o jungla.

selectia naturala functioneaza si la bacterii si la marile balene ! ...
desi pare incredibil, noi oamenii, suntem singurii din toata biosfera Terrei care nu are "asa ceva" ! ...
argumente gasesti pe net ! ...

Editat de abubue, 27 februarie 2016 - 09:23.

abubue, pe 27 februarie 2016 - 09:22, a scris:

abubue, pe 21 februarie 2016 - 23:39, a scris:

Pai si cancerul asta care nu are leac ce este?
Mana Monsanto. am uitat....

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 00:06, a scris:

De ce sa nu se reproduca ? Poate ca era un geniu, chiar daca era condamnat la scaun cu rotile.

 imrs.jpg   24,68K   4 download-uri

hunor66, pe 27 februarie 2016 - 13:12, a scris:

il putem clona ! ... mai multi d'stia, poate "ne rezolva" problemele ! ...
oricum Hawking zice ca vom muri cu totii "pe mana robotilor" ! ... cam in 80 de ani ! ...
cand majoritatea dintre noi nu vom mai fi ! ...

Editat de abubue, 28 februarie 2016 - 11:45.

Hai repede si cu Area 51 pana nu se raceste discutia

yo's de la tara ! ...
ce este "Aria 51" ?

Ceva sinonim cu teoria conspirației

Asta până nu îţi dai cu nasul în poarta pe care scrie: accesul interzis, "area51".

Editat de scaiba, 28 februarie 2016 - 17:19.

Scientist Who Discovered that GMO's Cause Tumors Wins Lawsuit


Now, Prof. Séralini is in the news again - this time for winning a major court victory in a libel trial that represents the second court victory for Séralini and his team in less than a month.

On November 25, the High Court in Paris indicted Marc Fallous, the former chairman of France's Biomolecular Engineering Commission, for "forgery" and the "use of forgery." The details of the case have not been officially released.

But according to this article from the Séralini website, Fallous used or copied the signature of a scientist whose name was used, without his agreement, to argue that Séralini and his co-workers were wrong in their studies on Monsanto products, including GM corn.

A sentencing for Fallous is expected in June 2016.

This was the second such court victory for the professor's team, following a November 6 victory in adefamation lawsuit over an article in the French Marianne magazine which categorized the Séralini team research as "scientific fraud".

What few people realize about the original Séralini study on GMOs is that it was only retracted after a serious PR offensive from Monsanto and the Biotech industry, one that included the creation of a whole new position on the original Food and Toxicology journal: Associate Editor for Biotechnology.

The new position was actually filled by a former Monsanto employee who helped convince the journal's author to retract the study.

Now more than 2 years later, these are the facts:

Séralini and his team's original study has been republished in a different peer-reviewed journal, Environmental Sciences Europe; they have won two key lawsuits against those who have attempted to ruin their reputations; and a recent peer-reviewed letter even asserted that Séralini and his team may have been right after all on their discovery showing tumors in lab rats fed GMOs.

In other words, the jury is still out on GMO safety to say the very least, just as countless independent scientists have warned, and Séralini's study stands as yet another cause for concern with the ongoing GMO experiment.

It also shows the lengths that the Biotech industry will go to in order to discredit any independent science that clashes with their own version of science.

For more on Séralini and his studies, check out the team’s website by clicking on this link.

Editat de a3ds, 28 februarie 2016 - 22:25.

hunor66, pe 27 februarie 2016 - 13:12, a scris:

Decat cu asa genii, mai bine lipsa  ...

abubue, pe 22 februarie 2016 - 07:57, a scris:

Stii vorba aia: ai grija ce iti doresti, ca s-ar putea sa primesti ?