Posts: 5,640
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
As a fellow skeptic you know that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I haven’t been involved in meetings for a while but has the burden of proof now switched? What would your response be to a claim of an In n Out Burger on Mars?
No need for name calling, EW. Sorry I missed your admission that your list was wrong and that you didn’t check it before posting. Let me guess, a less than reputable website? Good luck with the court case, please keep us informed on its progress.
Posts: 1,674
Threads: 81
Joined: Aug 2014
In-and-out burger on Mars. Mcky D's on Mercury. Pizza Hut on the moon. Your knowledge of fast food joints and heavenly bodies are top notch.
I'm getting hungry. Not for that GMO fast food though.
Sorry for losing my temper and calling troll. Happy burger grilling and 4th Puna peeps.
Posts: 10,212
Threads: 344
Joined: Apr 2009
Paul wrote:
"
As a fellow skeptic you know that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I haven’t been involved in meetings for a while but has the burden of proof now switched? What would your response be to a claim of an In n Out Burger on Mars?"
We're not talking about extraordinary claims. Several countries and cities have either banned glyphosate use or are planning to. Whether that is sensible or not is another matter.
https://www.baumhedlundlaw.com/toxic-tor...te-banned/
Posts: 1,674
Threads: 81
Joined: Aug 2014
As I have learned so far from this thread:
Just waiting for your link to be claimed bunk Tom, and then of course zero counter-evidence to be provided.
Posts: 5,640
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
For those of us following the hysteria against Roundup, giving a list of 10 countries, including France and Germany, and saying they have ALL banned ALL use of Roundup is indeed a very extraordinary claim and indeed it turns out it was false, which I knew from having followed this story. Hence my request for a source. Sorry if I offended anyone by asking a question.
Posts: 5,640
Threads: 101
Joined: Dec 2008
By the way, looks like Bermuda has changed its mind:
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/...-concerns/
And Sri Lanka:
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/...-industry/
So it looks like there are now NO countries that have a full ban on Roundup.
Extraordinary claims indeed.
Posts: 1,674
Threads: 81
Joined: Aug 2014
Here, I'm gonna do exactly what you did Paul:
You're wrong.
Your websites are bunk.
Want me to prove it and supply my own link for proof? Never!T
Edited to add:
While you're there Paul please pick me up a sirloin burger combo for me at your JACK-IN-THE -BOX on Jupiter.
Posts: 1,674
Threads: 81
Joined: Aug 2014
You see Paul, our intentions here are different from mine. It's obvious.
My intentions are to raise awareness of the people of the possible dangers of Roundup.
It seems your intentions are entirely focused on proving me wrong or derailing my thread. You even stated previously that you don't even really use Roundup and you didn't really know one way or the other if it was dangerous.
From your mouth:
Posted - 04/26/2018 : 22:34:11 Show Profile Reply with Quote
"I didn't say they were good, you said they're not good! In any way shape or form, no less. Have fun trying to prove that.
I have never used Roundup, I have no idea if it's harmful to humans. I just know that despite repeated attempts there has never been any evidence produced that it is harmful. On the contrary, it has been very carefully scrutinized. I'm ready to change my stance based on evidence. Are you?"
You continue to talk about outrageous claims when there are none. I have already established that I was mistaken when I made a list of entire countries banning the herbicide. I have revised what I said and provided a link and so did Tom (that you probably didn't read) with Many, Many countries imposing a partial ban or planning on a full ban of this "harmless product".
My point is that it is JUST AS ALARMING if such actions are underway even if it isn't the whole country. I imagine it would be even harder for the whole country to ban, (dealing with politicians). You need to stop dwelling on the one fact of my mistaken list. That's all you got.
Posts: 1,238
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2018
We're going to have to agree to disagree here folks. The unmovable object has met an irresistible force. Or something.
Posts: 1,975
Threads: 47
Joined: Jul 2012
Back to the OP...
How will the legal counsel of Mr. Johnson prove that RoundUp is causing cancer when a huge body of research since 1974 has never uncovered such a finding? It is not the responsibility of the judge - or as the judge instructs the jury - the responsibility of the jury to interpret the science. Rather the judge/jury will access the credibility of the expert witnesses - scientists - who will testify to interpret the body of research surrounding the potential carcinogenic affects of glyphosate in humans.
If there was some new evidence was found that glyphosate causes cancer in humans it would be ground breaking and published in a top journal like Nature or Science and picked over with a fine tooth comb by all of academia because it would contradict decades of research. Since this has not happened why would the judge or jury find that RoundUp is causing cancer in Mr. Johnson or anyone else for that matter?
I am curious if anyone has any input on this - not really interested in discussing if it has been banned or anything outside of the current court case actually.
