Moonbat Luddites Attack Science
Here‘s a rebuttal to leftists who recite the absurd talking point that their pro-liberty opponents are somehow hostile to science:
Vandals in Germany have destroyed two experimental sites growing genetically modified (GM) wheat and potatoes. On the night of 9 July, half a dozen masked attackers overpowered the security guard watching over test fields in Gross LÃ¼sewitz, near Rostock. They then destroyed a field of wheat resistant to fungal diseases and a field of potatoes engineered to produce cyanophycin, an amino acid polymer that could potentially be used to make plastics. The fields were part of a trial funded by the German government to develop a more-efficient testing system for gm crops. Two nights later, a dozen attackers threatened guards with pepper spray and bats at a demonstration garden in Ãœplingen, in the state of Saxony-Anhalt. They destroyed a field of potatoes and trampled wheat and maize. Police estimate the damages from the attacks at more than â‚¬250,000. No suspects have been arrested.
Germany’s answer to our radicalized Democrat Party responds:
[T]he local Green party in Rostock went ahead with a long-planned anti-GM demonstration at the Gross LÃ¼sewitz test site on Monday. A speaker for the local party said she could “understand but not support” the attacks.
That is, she approves but refuses to take responsibility.
Pretty much all the food we eat is genetically modified, if only by breeding. That’s why we are able to feed so many people. To attack GM food is to attack feeding the hungry.
Yet again we see that the liberal agenda cannot be explained without recourse to the concept of evil for the sake of evil.
On a tip from Philip. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.
Out of a horrific tragedy, comes good that benefits so many others. A little boy, a twin, who only lived
Science Has Finally Determined Just How Many Licks it Takes to Get to the Center of a Tootsie Pop [Video]
Well, I can die happy now. The question of my lifetime has finally been answered… and no, it’s not three
Why? Because “There’s no compelling scientific argument for drastic action to ‘decarbonize’ the world’s economy.” After a few paragraphs describing