GMO conspiracy theories

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Rusty, anything can be toxic in the wrong quantities. Take salt for an example. Without salt you would die, drink only saltwater and you will die.

BT can't harm us, because our digestive system is acid based, even those of us that have to use acid blocking meds. One problem with the long term use of some of them is a vitamin deficiency because we need a certain amount of acid to utilize some vitamins.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
The GMO conspiracy can be summed up in two words. Market share. An easy way to get market share is to induce fear.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
My two words would be 'a distraction'. All the 'Frankenfood' hooplah is entirely besides the point in my mind. The issue worthy of concern here isn't whether or not the tomato we're eating is going to eat us back. It's the very real desire and effort to patent all food-producing plants. The patenting of life is a bad idea. It slows down science rather than speed it up, like in the case of human genome patents. ALL of the human genes we've identified have been patented, and that means medical researchers have to pay companies to conduct research surrounding those genes. That means that when you donate to cancer research, a fair deal of that money has to go to companies like Monsanto, simply so the researchers can do their jobs legally. Monsanto isn't a big name in human gene patenting so far as I know, but they certainly instigated the process through which it became legal. Gene patenting is really screwed up, as it completely ignores what a patent is supposed to be. Patents are meant to bestow ownership of a process or an invention... our genes are neither, and yet the law was bent to suit the purpose of business.

There's a slightly stronger argument for the patenting of plants/seeds, as genetic modification is a 'process.' Still, it was quite strictly against the law to try and patent life until Monsanto lobbyists bamboozled congress with a bacteria they represented as a chemical, and not just for moral reasons. It was a matter of fair business as well, as it prevented anyone from patenting a breed of dog/cow/horse, ect. and gaining a monopoly over any sort of livestock.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
I don't mind discussing the business side of the GMO debate. I can agree with some of the complaints against Monsanto or even the patenting of genes, whether human or plant genes. This however, that does not make me throw out all data on the safety of GM foods. That is where food nannies go wrong, they try and turn bad business into bad food.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
I'd agree. Though there is some cause for concern regarding the safety of any food product, be it on the vine/in the fridge/on the kitchen counter, and GMO's, as they're released, deserve a level of scrutiny greater than more 'traditional' produce, the rhetoric surrounding the 'these plants are killing us..!' theory seems largely based in hysteria, and confusion about the science involved in GMO's... mostly leaning toward it being far more advanced, reckless, and insidious than the actual information we have on it suggests. They could be right in some cases, I can certainly begin to understand, as a layman anyway, how in tweaking the genes of a plant that plant may develop in unexpected ways within the natural environment, and some of those unexpected developments could maybe harm people. (my dad has a very strong allergy to kiwi-fruit, for example... but to no other fruits that we're aware of. Is it impossible that a GMO fruit of another sort might unwittingly antagonize this allergy?) That being said, it all seems like speculation at the moment.

The real safety issue I have with GMO's isn't the products themselves, but who controls them, and what they're used for. There's a very powerful drive to make the food market worldwide as much of a financial abstraction as the futures exchange, and Monsanto is a strong agent of that push. Booms and busts of the stock market already have far too direct an influence over the livelihoods of those who have no affiliation with it whatsoever. Housing bubbles leave many people in terribly desperate circumstances when they burst. Food bubbles, a very real thing in today's markets, starve millions. Much like gene patenting, GMO patenting isn't going to help drive the science of GMO's forward, it's going to have the opposite effect... and gives precisely the wrong people far too much control over our daily bread.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
I'd agree. Though there is some cause for concern regarding the safety of any food product, be it on the vine/in the fridge/on the kitchen counter, and GMO's, as they're released, deserve a level of scrutiny greater than more 'traditional' produce, the rhetoric surrounding the 'these plants are killing us..!' theory seems largely based in hysteria, and confusion about the science involved in GMO's... mostly leaning toward it being far more advanced, reckless, and insidious than the actual information we have on it suggests. They could be right in some cases, I can certainly begin to understand, as a layman anyway, how in tweaking the genes of a plant that plant may develop in unexpected ways within the natural environment, and some of those unexpected developments could maybe harm people. (my dad has a very strong allergy to kiwi-fruit, for example... but to no other fruits that we're aware of. Is it impossible that a GMO fruit of another sort might unwittingly antagonize this allergy?) That being said, it all seems like speculation at the moment.

The real safety issue I have with GMO's isn't the products themselves, but who controls them, and what they're used for. There's a very powerful drive to make the food market worldwide as much of a financial abstraction as the futures exchange, and Monsanto is a strong agent of that push. Booms and busts of the stock market already have far too direct an influence over the livelihoods of those who have no affiliation with it whatsoever. Housing bubbles leave many people in terribly desperate circumstances when they burst. Food bubbles, a very real thing in today's markets, starve millions. Much like gene patenting, GMO patenting isn't going to help drive the science of GMO's forward, it's going to have the opposite effect... and gives precisely the wrong people far too much control over our daily bread.


Speculation doesn't scare me.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Me neither. Corporate entities like Monsanto with influence over the hunger of millions most certainly do.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Me neither. Corporate entities like Monsanto with influence over the hunger of millions most certainly do.

I disagree. I think the influence of Monsanto is exagerrated. They are still trying to.ger a foothold in Europe and many developing nations will say eff you. There is a great deal if public funded, open source, research going on that mitigate against the corporations.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
You are still imposing speculation on Monsanto's possible future business practices or motives.
Monsanto's seed pricing already has a significant influence on global food prices. If Monsanto has a monopoly on corn in the US (which it does), and raises the price of their seed by 35% or so (which they're doing), the price of corn will go up (which it has) and fewer people will be able to afford it (which they are). I'm not imposing speculation. I am observing the reality.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Monsanto's seed pricing already has a significant influence on global food prices. If Monsanto has a monopoly on corn in the US (which it does), and raises the price of their seed by 35% or so (which they're doing), the price of corn will go up (which it has) and fewer people will be able to afford it (which they are). I'm not imposing speculation. I am observing the reality.

Your NYT articale is 3 years old, trying to blame the DOJ (that was dismissed) investigation on seed prices. Many factors play into overall food price. I'd like to see numbers on seed price rise vs the rise in yield and the decrease in inputs to the farmer.

The way I see if GM is not going away anytime soon. The more people oppose the sound science behind it, and/or try to block it through politics, the more it makes your fear of Monsanto having a monopoly a reality. The more opposition to it means less research, which means less funding and that means less start ups. The more money that gets funded to non Monsanto research into GMO means less chance of a monopoly. Oppose Mansanto or 'big business' but don't oppose the science of it. Don't say just because Mansanto will control everything that that automatically means it will be bad. Because so far it isn't!
 

Grieves

Senior Member
Your NYT articale is 3 years old, trying to blame the DOJ (that was dismissed) investigation on seed prices.
That's a misrepresentation of the content of the article. It doesn't 'blame' the department of justice for anything.


The way I see if GM is not going away anytime soon. The more people oppose the sound science behind it, and/or try to block it through politics, the more it makes your fear of Monsanto having a monopoly a reality. The more opposition to it means less research, which means less funding and that means less start ups. The more money that gets funded to non Monsanto research into GMO means less chance of a monopoly. Oppose Mansanto or 'big business' but don't oppose the science of it. Don't say just because Mansanto will control everything that that automatically means it will be bad. Because so far it isn't!
As I said before of the 'frankenfood' debate, and as it's being employed once again: a distraction.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
That's a misrepresentation of the content of the article. It doesn't 'blame' the department of justice for anything.

They are using the DOJ investigation and other points to blame Monsanto and GM seed for the rise in food prices. That investigation as since been closed. What percentage of seeds being sold are actually GM seeds?
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Seed price is not the only factor into food prices. If the seeds cost more but the farmer is producing more per yield and saving money on inputs then I'm sure they are okay with it. There needs to be proof that GM seed price is the sole factor in rising food prices to have me concerned. If farmers are buying expensive seeds over inexpensive seeds it must be because they like them more. They make more money from them. Food nannies are trying to suppress science through politics and their world view.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Also if GM seed prices are high, I could speculate it might be because supply is low. The less types of seeds or few companies producing them drives price up. Again the on going attempt to suppress the science of GM only strengthens Mansantos supposed foothold.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
This is a very good read, his use of caps is a bit excessive but I think that is just how graduate professors are used to talking.
http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/articles/biotech-art/hypocrisy.html

This is NOT about protecting the consumer or the health of the consumer, it's about market share and economics. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. The more the "organic" crowd can scare the consumer about the dangers of genetic engineering, the greater their market share and profit.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
The real safety issue I have with GMO's isn't the products themselves, but who controls them, and what they're used for. There's a very powerful drive to make the food market worldwide as much of a financial abstraction as the futures exchange, and Monsanto is a strong agent of that push. Booms and busts of the stock market already have far too direct an influence over the livelihoods of those who have no affiliation with it whatsoever. Housing bubbles leave many people in terribly desperate circumstances when they burst. Food bubbles, a very real thing in today's markets, starve millions. Much like gene patenting, GMO patenting isn't going to help drive the science of GMO's forward, it's going to have the opposite effect... and gives precisely the wrong people far too much control over our daily bread.

Soulfly, you are fairly new, but Grieves has already made it quite clear in earlier parts of this thread that he is anti-capitalist.
The discussion derailed the thread for some time around page 6-8 . The patent process encourages investment by protecting the investor for 20 years of exclusive rights to his invention, or compensation as royalty for the use of it. GMO patented plants have fed billions of people as a result, and will help improve the lives of billions more when accepted and expanded worldwide.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
He seems to have his mind made up, I don't see the point in him debating about it. He defiantly is not going to convince any skeptics with faulty, misinterpreted or cherry picked data. At least for me, I see through the politics of trying to vilify a science.

Edit: And we are not going to convince him to look at the data objectively.
 

Grieves

Senior Member
That investigation as since been closed. What percentage of seeds being sold are actually GM seeds?
Monsanto alone has a 23% share of the global seed market, last time I checked.

Seed price is not the only factor into food prices.
Are you denying its a major one?

Again the on going attempt to suppress the science of GM only strengthens Mansantos supposed foothold.
I'm not talking about the science. Haven't been this entire thread. Once more, I find the controversy of GMO 'safety' to be a distraction from the far more important issue of corporate influence over global food pricing, and our inability/unwillingness to regulate and police these industries in a way that ensures price-gouging isn't an option, as price gouging with seed/food leads to starvation, for very obvious reasons.

This is a very good read, his use of caps is a bit excessive but I think that is just how graduate professors are used to talking.
Again, you go back to the issue of GMO safety as a counterargument to my concerns, which have absolutely nothing to do with GMO safety. A distraction.

GMO patented plants have fed billions of people as a result, and will help improve the lives of billions more when accepted and expanded worldwide.
Under the loving and benign reign of Monsanto? '

He seems to have his mind made up, I don't see the point in him debating about it. He defiantly is not going to convince any skeptics with faulty, misinterpreted or cherry picked data. At least for me, I see through the politics of trying to vilify a science.
I haven't vilified the science. Again, you employ the distraction, attacking opinions I quite simply don't hold.

Edit: And we are not going to convince him to look at the data objectively.
The only 'data' you seem to have provided so far is a noisy rant about the safety of GMO science, which, for hopefully the last time, is not an issue for me.

Read this. It MIGHT give you a better idea of where I'm coming from in regard to the patent-law surrounding GMO's. If after reading this you somehow get back to the 'GMO safety' thing, I'll know you're just running in circles for the sake of trying to make heads spin.

The world’s largest purveyors of industrial agriculture would like to convince the rest of us that the global food market is as free as the market for any other widget—even though no one can opt out of purchasing breakfast, lunch, or dinner for any extended period of time, or in any meaningful way. Since everyone must participate in the food market to the tune of 2,700 or so calories a day, food property rights allow those who hold food patents a guaranteed portion of profits from a guaranteed purchase, which is fundamentally unfair. Why should Big Ag possess privileges beyond any other sort of business on earth? The rules that govern patents for electronics and entertainment should not be the same rules that govern the most vital element of human life.

More than eight decades’ worth of plant patent protection has formed one of the agricultural industry’s strongest bulwarks—and that’s why patent laws are exactly what the food movement should be targeting. The most direct and efficient way to undermine the food industrialist monopoly of the molecular seed business is to reform these laws (particularly the utility patent law of 1985), and make food property rights less exclusive, less lucrative, and less enduring
.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Only 23% market share leaves 77% share for other companies. Hardly a monopoly!

I'm done!

Mon-satan doesn't deserve even a 1% market share, their 22,000 strong army of Corporate slaves should be all be burned at the stake too!

Death to capitalismo!

Burn them all!

Look what they are doing to you!


monsatanists.jpg

Death to Monsanto, Say World Scientists

By Ranjit Dev Raj NEW DELHI

Mar 11 (IPS) - Conscientious genetic engineers and activists from across the world Thursday called for a slow but sure death for Monsanto, the U.S seed giant they say threatens life on earth with its genetically modified crops.

''It must be death by a thousand cuts,'' said Tony Clarke, director of the Polaris Institute in Canada which assists social movements to develop tools, skills and strategies for fighting economic globalisation and corporate power.

''The only way to tackle Monsanto which has 300 million dollars to play around with and regularly buys out scientists and policy makers is to slowly bleed it by burning crops, sueing it in court and occupying its offices,'' Clarke advised.

Endorsing the strategy, Claude Alvarez, an Indian activist said ''Gandhi taught us to break to break immoral laws and explain later in court.'' Alvarez said the best place to begin the fight against biotechnology giants was in India itself where Gandhi perfected civil disobedience and where patents are routinely ignored. ''We should teach Monsanto a lesson right here,'' he said.

http://www.converge.org.nz/lac/articles/news990314a.htm
======================

Monsanto Goons Terrorize Farmers

Farmers in North America have few options when it comes to dealing with the Satan of corporations, Monsanto. They are damned to hell if they buy its products and are damned if they don't.

Monsatano's goons target any farmer who isn't buying its products by threatening them with a lawsuit for patent infringement......
http://www.wakawfarmersmarket.org/0-5107-monsanto-goons-terrorize-farmers.html
=========================

WARNING: THIS IMAGE OF THE MONSATAN MAY BE DISTURBING !

monsatan.jpg
 

Grieves

Senior Member
They're expanding constantly and aggressively. Their monopoly in the United States over several major crops is unquestionable. They've reached this 23% figure in the Global seed market over hardly a decade. They aren't and wont be satisfied with it. No, Monsanto doesn't have a global monopoly over all seed pricing on the planet. I didn't say they did. If you don't think 23% of the market is a significant step toward such a monopoly, or that 23% of the global seed market wouldn't give Monsanto's seed pricing a fair level of influence over the global food market, you're kidding yourself. I'd like to see patent-law in regards to agriculture reformed before there's a global monopoly, not wait until there is one. If you were really about advancing the science, you'd agree with me, as the patent-policy surrounding GMOs restricts research into them rather than promoting it.
It seems to me you didn't even bother to glance at the article I presented.

And Jay, don't be an ass. Yes, I'm not fond of capitalism in its current form. Get over it.
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
The influence on GM in Global agriculture tends to be over exaggerated as well seeing how many countries it is limited to.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126862629333762259.html
 

Grieves

Senior Member
That seems a pretty solid piece on the issue, Bigger. It does speak on the monopoly Monsanto has over India's seed market, the 5th largest on the planet, so it says. I'm not saying Monsanto is all-pervasive, I'm simply saying they clearly want to be/have the law on their side in North America, and efforts in that direction are worth resisting.
 

SR1419

Senior Member.
It does speak on the monopoly Monsanto has over India's seed market,.

Please stick to the facts- a 60% market share is NOT a monopoly.

Monsanto may sell 23% of the World's seeds but not all of the seeds they sell are GM seeds.
 

Jay Reynolds

Senior Member.
Monsanto connected to at least 200,000 suicides in India throughout past decade
Tuesday, January 04, 2011 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
Tags: India, Farmer, Suicides
(NaturalNews) When India's seed economy was forced by the World Bank to become globalized in the late 1990s, economic conditions within the nation's agricultural sector almost immediately took a nosedive for the worst. Much of the common Indian seed stock turned from saveable heirloom varieties to patented, genetically-modified (GM) varieties that expire after a single use and require the application of expensive and cumbersome pesticides in order to grow, which plunged many Indian farmers into abject poverty. And nearly 25 years later, the devastating effects of this corporate takeover of Indian agriculture has resulted in countless suicides, 200,000 of which have occurred just in the past ten years.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/030913_Monsanto_suicides.html#ixzz2TmDhhcTb

THIS IS A PROVEN FACT WITH STATISTICS! READ MORE ABOUT THIS AT GLOBALRESEARCH.CA!

Farmer suicides and Bt cotton area .jpg

monhulk.jpg
 

Leifer

Senior Member.
I don't think that the size of a company automatically places it in the "evil" category.
Now, Grieves did not say that....in those words exactly. But the gist of it is there. That opinion, is also present among a
wide swath of the population.....if it's big and a corp., it's evil. ...."they make too much money not to be evil".

On another forum, someone suggested searching google, typing.... (big corp. name) + "fraud" in the search box. The topic was "big pharma"related, and they suggested that this is proof that big pharma corps. are indeed evil.
Sure.....there was hit after hit of "pharma frauds".
I replied that they were adding bias to their search, so that's all they got in their results. I said if they instead changed the word "fraud" to "improved health", results would be different, although still had bias.

I also said that I tried their google search suggestion with (fraud) + any "brand name" item found within my view-of-sight on my computer desk....Nikon, Blistex, Asus, etc...All results brought up respective issues of fraud for every company.


added....
One could come away with what I said as, "see, most corps. commit fraud, therefore they are evil".....but it's not only corps who commit fraud, it's private citizens too...lots.....internet fraud, insurance fraud, voter fraud....the list is seemingly endless.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Monsanto connected to at least 200,000 suicides in India throughout past decade
Tuesday, January 04, 2011 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
Tags: India, Farmer, Suicides
(NaturalNews) When India's seed economy was forced by the World Bank to become globalized in the late 1990s, economic conditions within the nation's agricultural sector almost immediately took a nosedive for the worst. Much of the common Indian seed stock turned from saveable heirloom varieties to patented, genetically-modified (GM) varieties that expire after a single use and require the application of expensive and cumbersome pesticides in order to grow, which plunged many Indian farmers into abject poverty. And nearly 25 years later, the devastating effects of this corporate takeover of Indian agriculture has resulted in countless suicides, 200,000 of which have occurred just in the past ten years.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/030913_Monsanto_suicides.html#ixzz2TmDhhcTb

THIS IS A PROVEN FACT WITH STATISTICS! READ MORE ABOUT THIS AT GLOBALRESEARCH.CA!

Farmer suicides and Bt cotton area .jpg
Wow! Jay . . . I didn't know you were that passionate about GMO/Monsanto issues. . . :)
 

Grieves

Senior Member
I don't think that the size of a company automatically places it in the "evil" category.
The larger a corporation gets, the less oversight it can have over its 'externalities', and the less blame can be assigned to the corporations themselves. This is why major banks can launder hundreds of millions of dollars for drug cartels and terrorist organizations in full awareness of what they were doing, and get off with a moderate fine and a wag of the finger... because they're so very big that to put them out of business would have too big an impact on the financial markets/job figures. Giant corporations aren't necessarily 'evil', nor are all their employees by any stretch. Their size does however allow for their actions to have horrible consequences with no adequate accountability.

One could come away with what I said as, "see, most corps. commit fraud, therefore they are evil".....but it's not only corps who commit fraud, it's private citizens too...lots.....internet fraud, insurance fraud, voter fraud....the list is seemingly endless.
Again, when a citizen commits fraud, and they are caught doing it, they are prosecuted, serving often very harsh and appropriate sentences. Large corporations, in spite of having all the rights of people, share none of that accountability. Thus large corporations can be a shield for criminal activity at a massive scale.

Please stick to the facts- a 60% market share is NOT a monopoly.
mo·nop·o·ly

[muh-nop-uh-lee] Show IPA

noun, plural mo·nop·o·lies.1.exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.


 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
yes they have a MONOPOLY on their seeds, just like I have a MONOPOLY on the jewelry I make.

There are many non Monsanto seeds available. If India doesn't like their farmers dealing with them, they need to either spend their own money developing hybrid seeds or they need to encourage their universities to.
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Even if Mansanto produced and sold every single seed for every plant on this planet, that would not scare me, because it would still not make GMO unsafe to eat! ;)
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Even if Mansanto produced and sold every single seed for every plant on this planet, that would not scare me, because it would still not make GMO unsafe to eat! ;)
Wow! It would scare me . . . any absolute monopoly . . . unless controlled by a freely elected representative process is a prescription for disaster . . . :(
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Can a patent be put on anything that is not modified in some way? You can't patent something that just exists without some kind of innovation. If they modify or find a unique use for something, patents shouldn't be an issue. It won't stop you using the unmodified natural version freely will it?
 

Soulfly

Banned
Banned
Wow! It would scare me . . . any absolute monopoly . . . unless controlled by a freely elected representative process is a prescription for disaster . . . :(
I was being facetious. Just making the point, that making it a political or anti-capitalist fight against 'big business' doesn't change the current evidence that GMOs are safe to eat. Since the CTers can't fight the science they fight who is developing it and then transfer that fear of 'big business' into fear of the science or products.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Can a patent be put on anything that is not modified in some way? You can't patent something that just exists without some kind of innovation. If they modify or find a unique use for something, patents shouldn't be an issue. It won't stop you using the unmodified natural version freely will it?
That seems to be a technical issue . . . Disney I think tried to sue for Copyright infringement on some common phrases etc but withdrew their case . . .
 

David Fraser

Senior Member.
Can a patent be put on anything that is not modified in some way? You can't patent something that just exists without some kind of innovation. If they modify or find a unique use for something, patents shouldn't be an issue. It won't stop you using the unmodified natural version freely will it?

Interesting article on the Monsanto site. It maked it clear that patent must be novel.

http://www.monsanto.co.uk/news/ukshowlib.php?uid=14812
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mendel Poll Finds Many Believe QAnon And Other Conspiracy Theories General Discussion 13
Mick West Conspiracy Theories about Senator Kelly Loeffler's Campaign Staffer, 20, Killed in Car Crash. Election 2020 2
Mick West Burst Pipe Conspiracy Theories, Fulton County's State Farm Arena, Georgia Election 2020 20
T Is it less rational to believe in several conspiracy theories than only one? Conspiracy Theories 31
C Iran promotes anti-semetic conspiracy theories via American Herald Tribune Conspiracy Theories 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mick West Discussing 5G EMF Concerns, Theories, and Conspiracy Theories 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 15
Mick West TFTRH #33 – Anthony Magnabosco: Street Epistemology and Conspiracy Theories Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 2
Mick West TFTRH #15: Brad - Math vs. Conspiracy Theories Tales From the Rabbit Hole Podcast 21
Marin B Facebook moderators believing in conspiracy theories Conspiracy Theories 4
Critical Thinker Russia's role in promoting conspiracy theories General Discussion 20
Mick West Alex Jones Deplatforming and Related Conspiracy Theories Current Events 49
Mick West Eruption of Kilauea Volcano in Hawaii – Conspiracies and Science Current Events 34
Mick West Perspective on the popularity of conspiracy theories. Practical Debunking 23
M Bornong Can Belief in Chemtrails and/or other Conspiracy Theories Lead to Violence? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
G Applications of Game Theory to Assessing the Plausibility of Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 1
DannyBoy2k Are There Any Professional Groups Rebutting 9/11 Conspiracy Theories? 9/11 13
Cube Radio What British Muslims think about 9/11 Conspiracy Theories 9/11 26
ZoomBubba Las Vegas Massacre - Surveillance Footage? Conspiracy Theories 115
Mick West Debunked: Hurricane Harvey, Project Stormfury, Conspiracy Theories Current Events 40
Mick West Hurricane Harvey. Cat 4. Major flooding. Conspiracy Theories. Current Events 10
Mick West 2016 Berlin Truck Attack Conspiracy Theories Current Events 13
Mick West Current Events Forum Guidelines Current Events 0
skephu Changing Conspiracy Beliefs through Rationality and Ridiculing Practical Debunking 25
Marin B Garrett Graff : "Bungling" is a more likely explanation for government conspiracy theories Conspiracy Theories 7
Dick Holman How many people follow multiple conspiracy theories? Practical Debunking 12
Mick West When Absence of Evidence is Evidence of Absence in Conspiracy Theories Practical Debunking 35
MikeG Body Armor Order Indicates Major Military Deployments Conspiracy Theories 1
Mick West Vice: 'It Was Like a Cult': Leaving the World of Online Conspiracy Theories Escaping The Rabbit Hole 4
deirdre Zika Virus: News, microcephaly and conspiracy theories Health and Quackery 14
Critical Thinker Fareed Zakaria: An angry victim of the Internet misinformation websites, speaks out Practical Debunking 11
Trailspotter The Spreading of Misinformation Online Practical Debunking 13
Mick West Conspiracy Theories, Bad Reporting, Bunk, and the Malheur Militia Incident in Burns, Oregon Conspiracy Theories 74
MikeG Debunked: Mandatory Vaccines for Veterans Conspiracy Theories 11
MikeG Strong Cities Network Conspiracy Theories 0
Mick West 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: Inside The Lonely Lives Of Truthers, Still Looking For Their Big Break 9/11 46
MikeG Debunked: Government to Nationalize Food Supply Conspiracy Theories 0
MikeG Military Trains Conspiracy Theories 7
keefe Climate change and conspiracy theories - Lewandowsky General Discussion 3
Mick West Tianjin Explosion - Conspiracy Theories Conspiracy Theories 58
M Guccifer Claim: Nuclear attack in Chicago or Pennsylvania 2015 Conspiracy Theories 11
MikeG Claim: Charleston Shooting was a False Flag Conspiracy Theories 22
Whitebeard Germanwings Airbus Crash Conspiracy Theories General Discussion 89
Auldy Why is The Monarchy The Subject of Conspiracy Theories Conspiracy Theories 19
Mick West Charlie Hebdo Conspiracy Theories - Ignore or Address? Conspiracy Theories 255
Jay Reynolds Conspiracy Theories hamper fight against Ebola Conspiracy Theories 25
Leifer does Social Media + Ego help drive conspiracy theories ? General Discussion 63
Josh Heuer Paul Walker's unfortunate death - conspiracy theories General Discussion 1
nanotchi Conspiracy Theories being advertised Conspiracy Theories 2
AluminumTheory Super Typhoon Haiyan - HAARP & Conspiracy Theories Conspiracy Theories 102
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top