“Hi Kids! Welcome to the Biotechnology Basics Activity Book. This is an activity book for young people like you about biotechnology — a really neat topic…. You will see that biotechnology is being used to figure out how to: [1] grow more food; [2] help the environment; and [3] grow more nutritious food that improves our health. As you work through the puzzles in this book, you will learn more about biotechnology and all of the wonderful ways it can help people live better lives in a healthier world. Have fun!”

Okay so there are a few claims above lets look at them and the validity of each one:

Biotechnology is a really neat topic… lol just kidding…
GMOs (1)grow more food, (2)help the environment and (3)grow more nutritious food which improves health. GMOs also apparently help people live better lives and create a healthier world.

I think one of the easiest ones above to debunk is the claim to help the environment. Studies are now showing that Monsanto’s Roundup Ready corn is actually contaminating the soil with Glyphosate which are actually part of the toxin which kills ‘pests’. The key here however is that the Glyphosate is not toxic to roundup ready plants, meaning if you grow round up ready corn once, you will not be able to grow anything else not roundup ready, for many years; although more study is obviously required, but not likely.

“[G]lyphosate stimulates the growth of fungi and enhances the virulence of pathogens such as Fusarium, and “can have serious consequences for sustainable production of a wide range of susceptible crops.” They warn that “Ignoring potential non-target detrimental side effects of any chemical, especially used as heavily as glyphosate, may have dire consequences for agriculture such as rendering soils infertile, crops non-productive, and plants less nutritious.”

When asked if glyphosate is “environmentally benign” as claimed by proponents, he answered “Absolutely not. That’s an outright mistaken notion. Glyphosate is the single most important agronomic factor predisposing some plants to both disease and toxins. These toxins can produce a serious impact on the health of animals and humans.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php

The Mississippi Rice Council (MRC) has sounded a national alarm over damage caused by aerial drift of glyphosate, the main ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup, calling for severely restricted aerial application.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24775

The claim that GMO plants are more nutritious is bunk as well:

One way in which glyphosate can affect human health is that “micronutrients such as manganese, copper, potassium, iron, magnesium, calcium, and zinc are essential to humans. All of them can be reduced in availability by glyphosate; so glyphosate treated GT plants as well as other plants exposed to glyphosate have less mineral nutrients. “We are seeing a reduction in nutrient quality [in our food].”

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php

This is such a big issue, some are finding that GMOs are not only not as nutritious as non-GMOs, the features that are being engineered into organisms may themselves increase toxicity:

Monsanto’s pipeline of upcoming […] (GMOs) includes several new varieties specifically engineered with “stacked traits,” which means they contain multiple genetic modifications and built-in resistance traits as opposed to just one. […] these new multi-trait GMOs appear to be exponentially more harmful to humans than single-trait GMOs because of their synergistic toxicity.

http://www.naturalnews.com/035093_GMO_genetic_traits_toxicity.html

But the real kicker in the new research is the combined toxicity from exposure to both Roundup and Bt toxin which, according to the study, is tremendous. In their conclusion, researchers noted that “modified Bt toxins are not inert on nontarget human cells, and that they can present combined side-effects with other residues of pesticides specific to GM plants” (http://www.greenmedinfo.com).

It is even a lie that they grow more food, most farmers are seeing significantly lower yield on GMOs:

In 2010, Louisiana Rice Man noted that the pressure from bacterial panicle blight, leaf scald and leaf smut “was about the worst I have ever seen.” Though he attributes it to abnormally high temperatures, most likely the cause is glyphosate and/or glufosinate, which destroy soil microflora that assist in plant defense.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=24775

Although, what research is being done paints a much bleaker picture than the misinformation found in the Brainwashing Childrens activity book.

Another scientist warning about glyphosate and featured in the film is Andres Carrasco. In 2010, he released a summary of scientific evidence on genetically modified soy and the herbicide glyphosate, and its impact on humans. In Science Under Attack, Carrasco reports that glyphosate causes brain, intestinal and heart defects in fetuses.

The summary includes a “study on human cells [which] found that all four Roundup formulations tested caused total cell death within 24 hours. These effects were found at dilution levels far below those recommended for agricultural use and corresponding to low levels of residues found in food or feed.”

Of note, “The adjuvants in Roundup increase the toxicity of glyphosate because they enable the herbicide to penetrate human cells more readily.”

But don’t expect research to be picking up any time soon, look away nothing to see here:

“Unfortunately, most researchers are forbidden to do work in the area. They don’t have access to isogenic lines [conventional and Roundup Ready plant lines that are otherwise genetically identical], the materials are denied to researchers.”

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php

Furthermore, Monsanto claims that its injection of foreign DNA into its GM crops is also automatically safe because, get this, DNA is present in natural crops as well. Never mind that the injected DNA is foreign and unnatural, and is used to alter the entire genetic structure of GM crops — according to Monsanto, its unnatural DNA is automatically non-toxic because every other plant also has DNA. Case closed.

Using this same absurd illogic, injecting foreign animal DNA into a developing human baby, for instance, must also be safe because that baby contains DNA, right? Or how about drinking antifreeze, which is made of atoms, because your body is also made of atoms? Based on Monsanto’s pseudoscientific nonsense, everything can be considered non-toxic and safe because it is all made of atoms, just like our bodies!

http://www.naturalnews.com/034745_Monsanto_GM_foods_safety_testing.html

For more on the dangers of GMOS click on these links:

• http://www.prisonplanet.com/forget-asteroids-and-volcanoes-chemically-induced-infertility-threatens-human-race.html
• http://www.prisonplanet.com/scientists-warn-epa-over-monsanto%e2%80%99s-gmo-crop-failures-dangers-read-more-httpnaturalsociety-comscientists-warn-epa-over-monsantos-gmo-crop-failures-dangersixzz1otqe68kj.html
• http://www.prisonplanet.com/monsanto%e2%80%99s-roundup-is-killing-human-kidney-cells.html
• http://www.prisonplanet.com/usda-green-lights-field-trials-of-monsanto-drought-resistant-corn-after-admitting-it-performs-no-better-than-natural-corn.html

The biggest thing is the supposed link between global temperatures and CO2, which we are told is causal, that CO2 causes warming, however the data I’ve seen suggests otherwise. The first issue, is that when you look at the data, CO2 levels tend to be behind warming trends by about 5 – 10 years, this is the biggest lie I have seen from the Al Gore crowd, they put the graphs up and say, look they are nearly identical, other than the lag of CO2 levels which are then sold to you as the cause of the warming.

So what happens is that the Earth warms likely due to normal solar cycles and as the Earth warms, plant matter that has been trapped in Northern glaciers decays releasing CO2, one of likely many natural causes leading to the increased CO2 levels we are seeing.

In Bio you learned about buffers right? They are chemicals which remain in the body with little to no effect on the basic process of for example digestion, until there is a significant change in pH then these chemicals kick in to regulate the pH back to normal levels. IMO there are many parallels between the way in which our body regulates conditions for various biological processes, and the Earth which has similar tools.

One very interesting one (google plant grown in high CO2) is the fact that increased levels of CO2 actually stimulate plant growth, and as a result, the amount of conversion to oxygen. This means that if levels of CO2 get too high from the perspective of the Earth, she will handle this herself, bring CO2 down and increase O2. Now the problem is, since so much time has been wasted on CO2, we really don’t understand the other side of the buffers for temperature. One of the few we do understand comes from the most abundant greenhouse gas on the planet, know what it is? Steam. As temperatures increase, the water cycle will increase the amount of cloud cover, which will deflect sunlight which will eventually lead to global cooling. Although this gas works like other greenhouse gases which (we are told) traps heat in, the effect of reflecting sunlight is more significant. Sources of heat loose energy as they heat the planet, so trapped heat provides slightly less energy on its ‘second pass’ then what is reflected and never enters our atmosphere.

Now the problem here is that people with my views have been painted as somehow anti-environment and as a strong environmentalist I take offence to this. The fact is, elements within governments around the world see AGW as a cash cow, if they can make us afraid of our own planet, and we take the blame for it, they will also be able to convince us to pay to save us from the warming. Personally I am against ignorance and the fact that leaders use our own ignorance, usually a direct result of the information we are fed by those same individuals to pull the wool over our eyes. It is amazing to me that governments who are trying to regulate how much CO2 each of us contributes (no person is carbon neutral, carbon dioxide is human exhaust) turn a blind eye to the numerous chemicals which are constantly dumped into our environment. No need to worry about big corporations and what they pollute the world with, carbon dioxide is the culprit the only way to stop introducing CO2 as a human being is to stop breathing. Studies have shown that in the last few decades, since the increase in use of anti-depressants and other pharmaceuticals, the water table has been increasingly contaminated with these chemicals. Mostly because we don’t think to test to see what the levels are. As a human being, when you take a drug like Prozac, you will expel, through urine, any of the chemical your body does not process. This ends up in the water we flush down the toilet, and municipal water treatment does not treat for pharmaceuticals such as Prozac. I just read an article yesterday about sea life that are not only dieing at an increased rate, there is evidence they are actually committing suicide. So it seems to me that AGW is used as a distraction, to try to get environmentalists up in arms against CO2 emitters with little to no attention paid to other polluters. Want to know who one of the biggest polluters in the world is??? The US Military, mostly because they consider themselves outside the rule of law so you cant think that environmental regulations mean anything to them. Just think about all of the pollution from a nuclear powers ship/sub which is sunk. Just think as it begins to decay there are forms of oil, solvents, and of course nuclear waste. The fact is, it is much cheaper for the US to sink a ship, then to decommission it. Just saying…

I think a campaign need to be started in order to break environmentalism away from anthropogenic global warming since the fraud of GW scientists (Michael Mann’s Hockey stick graph anyone??) will give environmentalists a black eye and these scientists will take the environmentalists down with them destroying their credibility. We have been focused for far too long on this issue and what evidence they thought they had is loosing credibility faster than they could build it. I mean they have been shouting global warming from the rooftops for years and if the warming doesn’t happen as they are telling us it will, people sure as hell wont believe them when they start talking about the coming ice age but that, my friends is a topic for another rant.

For those of you that don’t know in the days before the well blew up, Halliburton were involved with setting a cement plug which would have temporarily sealed BP’s Moncondo exploration well. According to another article as early as February Halliburton knew there were problems with their recipe for the cement. They then kept this information from BP notifying them by email about only one of the tests, leaving out the tests with “unstable” results.

And get this:

Chevron recently carried out independent lab tests of a cement slurry that Halliburton said was the same as that used in the Macondo well. The commission staff said Chevron reported that “its lab personnel were unable to generate stable foam cement in the laboratory using the materials provided by Halliburton.

-Article.

Not only that it seems like Halliburton lied about the unstable tests. Apparently to an inquiry on the explosion, Tomas Roth, Halliburton’s Vice President for Cementing said their results showed the cement mixture was stable, which of course seems to question the unstable results but apparently they didn’t make this issue known to BP, although they claim they shared the data in an email to BP, but apparently they never used the words “unstable” in that email.

Now that is has come out that they have destroyed evidence, I would bet money the lost documents also include these unstable test results in the days preceding the explosion. Which would be tough if they gave them to BP through email.

Now Halliburton is blaming BP because they only used 6 of the 21 centralizers, a device that ensures the drill pipe is properly centered.

And then this:

Robert Bea, a professor and oil industry expert at the University of California at Berkeley, said that drillers will often run one test on a cement mixture, then a second test as a backup. He called four tests “unusual.”
“Given that they are running four, that’s telling me they were having trouble getting to a stable design,” Bea said. “And so they continued to work with this witches’ brew until they got on to something they thought was workable.”

-Article

But I came across another article where Halliburton admits it never performed a test of the mixture, but that BP ordered them to change the mixture last minute meaning it could not perform the needed tests. Either way, sounds like negligence to me.

I have to say from the onset of this disaster Halliburton’s roll didn’t really pass the smell test for me. Due mostly to their close involvement with the CIA and Pentagon during the Iraq war and all the no bid contracts they’ve received because Dick Chaney was on the board of directors, sounds like a CIA front company to me. 

These weren’t a bunch of idiots, they may need to learn a bit about hubris but I don’t think they were incapable of the job they were doing. So it begs the question on whether they knew what they were doing may endanger the well. The US Government always seems eager to embrace disasters it can avoid being seen as the cause of (like Hurricanes, floods and earthquakes), although one could argue the approval process for off shore oil rigs may be in their hands, and it is probably a sure bet that many congresmen and women have made millions off the off shore oil rig deals in one way or another.

Although, I think the elite of this world are hoping most of us wont.

Although, can you really call the Straight mainstream??

They have even mentioned the increased infant mortality rates since the disaster, which I haven’t seen elsewhere, except online of course.

But I think the thing that gets me the most, is the bullshit that there is no risk to the public, but 1 in 3,000 will likely develop cancer. Yeah you read that right, it is safe for 2,999 of 3,000, which considering the population of Vancouver alone, ( 2.1 million according to Wikipedia) that means at least 700 cases of new cancers, hardly no risk, low risk to the 2,099,300 who don’t develop cancer, leukemia, or some other disease.

And of course there is the always amusing comment that levels are within normal background exposure or exposure due to x-rays. This is not only misinformation; it is a complete distortion of the actual facts. The biggest risk of exposure to the fallout from Fukushima is not the radiation from the dust released, it is the dust itself. After inhaling the radioactive particles it will continue to expose a person to radiation every day, for the rest of their natural life. (Assuming of course, that the radiation doesn’t turn us into crime fighting super heroes of some kind)

I’m going to let that sink in. No risk to the public, unless you are one of the few to inhale radioactive dust, and then, well, the Canadian government sees you as expendable. Amazing, the people that claim to regulate us to death in order to save us from ourselves, don’t seem to give two shits about saving us from radiation exposure, or even keeping us informed of the levels of exposure. This is of course because Canadian companies make a killing selling uranium to other countries for, lets call them peaceful purposes, which is of course an argument for another time.

Fukushima Groundwater Contamination Worst in Nuclear History from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

The following video is probably one of the most heartbreaking things I have seen, maybe ever. If you can stomach it, take a look. (not gruesome, just tragic) 

These are the lost children of Chernobyl. Sentenced to live their lives trapped in their defective bodies, made that way because of our mistakes. These children have suffered, and will continue to suffer, likely for the majority of their existence. Who will take responsibility for what has happened to these children, not the Nuclear Industry/Lobby. I could never wish this fate on any child but poetic justice, or Karma may have something in mind for those singing nuclear technologies praises. Although, more likely, as with Chernobyl, the innocent will suffer. After all, these are just innocent children whose parents lived to close to this disaster. I wonder if they could, would they blame us for their suffering.

Is this our future?

I’m not really sure what the odds are on that, but maybe this will finally prove that the age old saying regarding lightning not striking the same place twice is a total myth.

(Some of the comments in youtube are claiming this video is fake (which is almost as common place as “first”), so judge for yourselves)