It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Monsanto Brainwashing Children With Kids' Activity Book

page: 3
17
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Monsanto has been engaging in PR campaigns for young people since they opened up the "Adventures in Inner Space Ride Brought To You By Monsanto" back in the 1960s at Disneyland in California.

Better living (and dying) through chemistry, baby.


I really dug that ride as a kid. Of course I had no clue I was being given a Monsanto sales pitch.

So there you go.




posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Domo...are you "Drunk Typing" again?


I know I am guilty of that many times but you seem to be lit up tonight...


Peace



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 



Originally posted by TsukiLunar
reply to post by Monsatan
 





To those claiming that life expectancy is going up, I ask you do a google search and debunk the hundreds of articles pointing otherwise.


First result, maybe you should debunk this.

www.google.com...:USA&dl=en&hl=en&q=life+expectancy
edit on 24-3-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)


People who seem pro always say life expectancies are higher now, more people can be fed with GM crops, starvation can be eradicated in third world counties, etc. So we create GM crops that grow better in harsh climates, we yield more food, we feed more starving people. Well, these starving people are now more fit and nourished, so they have more children. Those children grow up in the same third world area. Now we have more people to feed. We produce more GM crops, feed more people, and the same thing happens. Now the world is far more populated. Now there is a food shortage for all people since crop space is limited.

Here are my questions for pro-GMOers that has nothing to do with adverse health effects:

Why do pro-GMOers agree with the crops that will eventually cause more problems not only to people but to our entire ecosystem? Do you agree with the manipulation of nature for the betterment of only a few generations, and can you explain how they will be beneficial in 150 years if we keep up at the current rate of producing GMO foods?



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Monsatan
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Yeah, because I take the world bank's word as gospel. I'm not even wasting the time posting all of the university research, or all the news sites showing that the expectancy is dropping. 70 days at a time isn't a huge drop, but it adds up


So your not even going to take the time to debunk my argument? Instead you will just assert it is false without proof? How very sly of you.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jude11
 


How DARE you! Actually no, I'm relatively sober. That's much more sober than usual. I'm just bored and want to argue, and am a bit sick of ATS jumping on certain bandwagons. Can we meet half way and call me a purgatory agent?



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Absolutely. I can't post more than three links without everything getting deleted bc of this stupid iPad. You can believe whatever you please, but a search for life expectancy dropping gives hours of reading material.

Ironic how our medicine is evolving so quickly yet at the same time the rates of food borne illness and nutritional deficiencies are skyrocketing.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
F**king pathetic ....


That monsanto guy should have the death sentence.. seriously. Or he should be strapped down on national television, meanwhile being injected with all the same chemicals he puts into our food simultaniously, for 3 hours straight haha.. god damn -_-

~ Love is an art



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Domo1
You guys whine constantly that everything is bad for us. Why are we living longer? Were crops just more evil back then? Were there more chemtrails? Every tard on ATS knows modern medicine is the reason our lives are cut short..... Oh wait, again, we live longer. It's hard being a govt. shill sheep, but someone has to do it. We live longer, you whine more. Half of you welfare queens wouldn't even have food if it weren't for genetically engineered crops. EMBRACE YOUR MASTERS.

Actually you stated the reason we live longer right there: modern medicine. I've never really heard anyone claim modern medicine kills us, what they claim is that new groundbreaking treatments are being suppressed. Anyone with any degree of brain activity going on inside their skull clearly understands that organically grown foods are much safer and less hazardous to us. That is not to say all genetically modified foods are bad for us, but I would bet the majority of them cause obscure health problems. BE YOUR OWN MASTER.




posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by fictitious
 


quickly: i love your llama.

this makes me so mad. maybe it is just the way i am, but i cannot believe that messing with the genetic make-up of food (or anything for that matter) can be a good thing. we simply have not done the necessary testing to make sure this doesn't have any real unwanted side effects. we are finding out now that the food is actually less nutritious when it is gm. it's like saying god (or the world, whatever you believe) made a mistake and the real food that grows naturally is not good enough. and even the supposed purposes of creating the gm food, ie feeding the world has turned out to be complete bull as there are still millions who are starving to death.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 

But yet cancer rates and auto immune disorders are soaring even among the children.
And i bet the lifespans will come down soon as well.
edit on 25-3-2012 by juleol because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Life expectancy is getting longer, but quality of mental health anf physical health is decreasing. Our seniors are not healthy seniors, they sit in homes waiting for death until their 80's and 90's. Lengthier life does not mean better life. When we lived to roughly 45 back 800 years ago, we only became unable to move in the last few years of life. Now, almost all seniors past 70 are in horrible mental and physical condition. You can claim were living longer, only if it were actual living.

EDIT: Longer living people create bigger drains on Healthcare systems, hospitol, medical supplies (already having drug shortages in Canada) and the retirement system. If we are living 20 years past our retirement day, then that means more money has to be saved. Meaning longer working career. The whole system will have to be changed to make up for us "living longer".
edit on 25-3-2012 by AaronWilson because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   


quickly: i love your llama. this makes me so mad. maybe it is just the way i am, but i cannot believe that messing with the genetic make-up of food (or anything for that matter) can be a good thing. we simply have not done the necessary testing to make sure this doesn't have any real unwanted side effects. we are finding out now that the food is actually less nutritious when it is gm. it's like saying god (or the world, whatever you believe) made a mistake and the real food that grows naturally is not good enough. and even the supposed purposes of creating the gm food, ie feeding the world has turned out to be complete bull as there are still millions who are starving to death.
reply to post by couldbeanyone
 



I completely agree with what you said. People seem to think the manipulation of everything on our earth is perfectly fine, but one day we will see the devastating effects. It is just a matter of time. The world was created to maintain balance, and we are definitely throwing it out of whack.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by fictitious
 


you're absolutely right. BALANCE is KEY. we live in a world that teaches us it is ok to use and use and use. we're abusing the world and expecting everything to be peachy. well, it's not peachy. genetically altering our food is just one of the examples.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monsatan
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Absolutely. I can't post more than three links without everything getting deleted bc of this stupid iPad. You can believe whatever you please, but a search for life expectancy dropping gives hours of reading material.

Ironic how our medicine is evolving so quickly yet at the same time the rates of food borne illness and nutritional deficiencies are skyrocketing.


Okay, I would like to point this out, I backed up my post with evidence and got one star. He asserts something is true without any sources. He gets fours stars.

NOW, usually I don't care much about stars, but this is alarming. Why would people look at a post that says "No, I am not going to back up my claim." and then star it? That is alarming behavior from people on ATS and is not conductive to the site slogan of "Deny ignorance".

Just wanted to point that out.



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Ignorance is having to have the links (too many to ever post here) handed to you when I told you exactly what to search...twice

Just wanted to point that out
Stars mean absolutely nothing, you shouldn't need validation for what you write, it should be to further your, or someone else's, knowledge. So many here treat ATS as a popularity contest, I don't get it



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Monsatan
reply to post by TsukiLunar
 


Ignorance is having to have the links (too many to ever post here) handed to you when I told you exactly what to search...twice

Just wanted to point that out
Stars mean absolutely nothing, you shouldn't need validation for what you write, it should be to further your, or someone else's, knowledge. So many here treat ATS as a popularity contest, I don't get it


First off, you told me to "google" it. Didn't find anything to back up your claim.

Second, I just said i do not care about stars. What concerns me is people looking at your post and not learning anything from it even though they think they did.

So, give me sources for your argument or don't make the argument. Simple, yes.
edit on 25-3-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
 


Well fine I have no brain activitiy going on in my skull (I thought personal attacks were frowned upon here). Lets stay on topic. You're wrong. Wait...

Why is it not ok for a.wonderful company that feeds the world to promote itself? Coke and McDonalds do it. Whats wrong with teaching kids the truth?



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
There are soooooo many good things that could come from GMO foods if done without such evil motives. primarily profit margins



posted on Mar, 25 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Well, the older people might be living longer but not necessarily healthier. the babies on the other hand.....not so well:




abcnews.go.com...
The U.S. infant mortality rate is on the rise for the first time since 1958, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2001, the infant mortality rate was 6.8 deaths per 1,000 live births -- in 2002, the rate rose to 7.0. (2003 data is not yet complete.)

www.democraticunderground.com...
While the United States spends billions on medical care, as of 2006, the US ranked 28th in the world in infant mortality, more than twice that of the lowest ranked countries. (DHHS, CDC, National Center for Health Statistics. Health United States 2010, Table 20, p. 131, February 2011.)


Between Monsanto, vaccines and Monsanto, we ought to have population control figured out.




www.organicconsumers.org...

The fact is, it is virtually impossible to even conceive of a testing
procedure to assess the health effects of genetically engineered foods when
introduced into the food chain, nor is there any valid nutritional or
public interest reason for their introduction."

Professor Richard Lacey, microbiologist, medical doctor, and Professor of
Food Safety at Leeds University, world famous for his accurate prediction
of the dangers of " Mad cow disease". Professor Lacey has spoken out
strongly against the introduction of genetically engineered foods, because
of 'the essentially unlimited health risks'
And additionally with reference to the BSE crisis,
"We know to our cost that an organism which was utterly unknown to science
30 years ago, the prion, is capable of jumping from species to species, and
changing its own physical characteristics each time it crosses the barrier.
This shows that it is impossible to forsee what dangers lie in store... If
we continue to create new life forms artificially, we lay ourselves open to
the possibility of similar unimaginable dangers."
New Scientist - BSE's hidden horror



Brainwashing children should be a no-no. The fact the book is put out by Monsanto is scary enough. There is no food shortage except for what Monsanto is now causing in poor countries with their bad seeds
edit on 25-3-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 26 2012 @ 04:50 AM
link   
I find it utterly repugnant that any for profit organisation, can commission, and distribute, under any guise, or through any publisher, what amounts to a propeganda leaflet, designed solely to soften the minds of the young, against any future concerns they may have about what one of the worlds biggest companies is doing, and what they are putting into thier foods, chemical products, and medicines.

If BP had one of these booklets circulating, about how "oil wells relieve unwanted pressure in the earths crust, and how doing so reduces the risk of methane burps, and about how it also reduces the dangers of carbon capture processes and recycling, which are DAAAAANNNNGEROUS!!!" then they would be lynched within an inch of thier lives, and thier names struck from the records of man, never to be used again.

Government propeganda is bad enough, but when companies can get away with inserting it into the accepted educational environment, into the very curriculum itself, there is no way to protect the young from being accessed by these horrific untruths. It is all very well to say that a decent teacher should be able to help a child examine these things with cynicism and logic, to find thier own understanding. Yes I suppose that is true to a degree, but most people do not get a decent teacher. Most people get a teacher who while having good intentions when at university, has been ground down by time to the point where they probably see the periods when they are teaching, as the gaps between thier cigarette breaks, and little else.

It is VITAL that informational documents like this be independantly reviewed by experts randomly selected from a group, who are for the duration of thier examination of said documents, sequestered away from any financial influence that any publisher or backer might wish to bring to bare. If the subject matter expert deems the document to contain lies and heaps of bullcrap so massive as to block out the sun, the documents should be banned from being within one hundred and ten feet of a school or educational facility, and may not be distributed elsewhere either.

I would like to say that I am shocked and appalled by this, but really I wouldnt put anything past the people that bought us agent orange.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join