Lobbyist Won't Drink Roundup

monkeymania's picture

Lobbyist Claims Monsanto's Roundup Is Safe To Drink, Freaks Out When Offered A Glass

Dr Moore, who claims to be an ecological expert and is currently the frontman for Ecosense Environmental, stated to the interviewer that Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup was not responsible for skyrocketing cancer rates in Argentina. Moore was a member of Greenpeace in the 1970s, in 1986 he abruptly turned his back on the very issues he once passionately defended. He claims he “saw the light” but what Moore really saw was an opportunity for financial gain.

 

Since then he has gone from defender of the planet to a paid representative of corporate polluters like Monsanto he has made millions supporting polluters and pushing thinking like climate change being a hoax as he did on Fox and Friends today which Donald Trump then Tweeted about-even showcasing his pre-elementary school grasp of science stating that Carbon Dioxide is the building block of life. (3rd grade science class hammers home the fact that CARBON is the building block of life) Oh and "There is weather and climate around the world".........

 

 

TS4OlfG

3.866665
Average: 3.9 (15 votes)

Comments

monkeymania's picture
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

According to Greenpeace: How a Group of Ecologists, Journalists, and Visionaries Changed the World by Rex Wyler, the Don't Make a Wave Committee was formed in January 1970 by Dorothy and Irving Stowe, Ben Metcalfe, Marie and Jim Bohlen, Paul Cote, and Bob Hunter and incorporated in October 1970.[9] The Committee had formed to plan opposition to the testing of a one megaton hydrogen bomb in 1969 by the United States Atomic Energy Commission on Amchitka Island in the Aleutians. Moore joined the committee in 1971 and, as Greenpeace co-founder Bob Hunter wrote, "Moore was quickly accepted into the inner circle on the basis of his scientific background, his reputation [as an environmental activist], and his ability to inject practical, no-nonsense insights into the discussions."[

 

In January 1977 at the annual general meeting of the Greenpeace Foundation, Moore ran for president against Bob Hunter, eventually losing by a single vote.[19] Soon after, Hunter stepped down and Moore assumed the presidency, inheriting an organization that was deeply in debt.[20] Greenpeace organizations began to form throughout North America, including cities such as Toronto, Montreal, Seattle, Portland, Los Angeles, Boston, and San Francisco. Not all of these offices accepted the authority of the founding organization in Canada. Moore's presidency and governance style proved controversial.[citation needed] Moore and his chosen board in Vancouver called for two meetings to formalize his governance proposals. During this time David Tussman, together with the rest of the founders, early activists of Greenpeace, and the majority of Greenpeace staff-members announced that the board of the San Francisco group intended to separate Patrick Moore's Greenpeace Foundation from the rest of the Greenpeace movement. After efforts to settle the matter failed, the Greenpeace Foundation filed a civil lawsuit in San Francisco charging that the San Francisco group was in violation of trademark and copyright by using the Greenpeace name without permission of the Greenpeace Foundation.

The lawsuit was settled at a meeting on 10 October 1979, in the offices of lawyer David Gibbons in Vancouver. Attending were Moore, Hunter, David McTaggart, Rex Weyler, and about six others. At this meeting it was agreed that Greenpeace International would be created. This meant that Greenpeace would remain a single organization rather than an amorphous collection of individual offices. McTaggart who had come to represent all the other Greenpeace groups against the Greenpeace Foundation, was named chairman. Moore became president of Greenpeace Canada (the new name for Greenpeace Foundation) and a director of Greenpeace International. Other directors were appointed from the US, France, the UK, and the Netherlands. He served for nine years as president of Greenpeace Canada, as well as six years as a director of Greenpeace International.

 

In 1986, after leaving Greenpeace over differences in policy, Moore established a family salmon farming business, Quatsino Seafarms, at his home in Winter Harbour. He commented that he had left Greenpeace because it "took a sharp turn to the political left" and "evolved into an organization of extremism and politically motivated agendas".

+1
-3
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

The European Food Safety Authority concluded in November 2015 that "the substance is unlikely to be genotoxic (i.e. damaging to DNA) or to pose a carcinogenic threat to humans", later clarifying that while carcinogenic glyphosate-containing formulations may exist, studies "that look solely at the active substance glyphosate do not show this effect."[10][11] The WHO and FAO Joint committee on pesticide residues issued a report in 2016 stating the use of glyphosate formulations does not necessarily constitute a health risk, and giving admissible daily maximum intake limits (one milligram/kg of body weight per day) for chronic toxicity.[12] The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) classified glyphosate as causing serious eye damage and toxic to aquatic life, but did not find evidence implicating it as a carcinogen, a mutagen, toxic to reproduction, nor toxic to specific organs.[13]

 

The consensus among national pesticide regulatory agencies and scientific organizations is that labeled uses of glyphosate have demonstrated no evidence of human carcinogenicity.[92][93] Organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization, European Commission, Canadian Pest Management Regulatory Agency, and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment[94] have concluded that there is no evidence that glyphosate poses a carcinogenic or genotoxic risk to humans.[92] The final assessment of the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority in 2017 was that "glyphosate does not pose a carcinogenic risk to humans".[92][95] The EPA has classified glyphosate as Group E, meaning "evidence of non-carcinogenicity in humans".[92][96] Only one international scientific organization, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), affiliated with the WHO, has made claims of carcinogenicity in research reviews. The IARC has been criticized for its assessment methodology by failing to consider the broad literature and only assessing hazard rather than risk.[92]

+1
-2
-1
Vote comment up/down
thegent's picture

i have some in the back do you want to drink some?

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

 

This guy literally drinks Glyphosate.  Now what?

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
thegent's picture

well if it happened on tv it must be true..

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid's picture

Isn't this the stuff Alex Jones raves about like a lunatic on his show? I always wondered how you spell that. So that's what Alex Jones is talking about? Didn't know you were a fan....

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
Cahu's picture

Roundup fucks with a plant's ability to absorb an essential protein to stay alive, so it starves them to death. It was developed to annihilate the jungle back in the 60's, in a much more potent form called Agent Orange. In high concentrations, it had devastatingly toxic and carcinogenic effects on soldiers. There are untold numbers of documentaries on this. In it's more light version, Roundup kills all plants that are not genetically modified to resist it, so in effect it is an easy way to spray around the field and destroy everything except your genetically modified plantations. If you wash your vegatables and fruit sufficiently, it should get rid of most of the product, I do not know exactly how much is absorbed by these vegatables and/or fruits, but it's evidently not a sufficient amount that is cause of concern to the regulatory agencies. Roundup is vital in maximizing yield (mainly economically, since it becomes much cheaper to ensure there is no competition to your plantation for a relatively cheap price). So long as Roundup is seen as a vital part of agriculture, it will continue to permeate our lifes on and off, based on our capacity to withdraw from it through non-gliphosate certified products.

 

What is happening in Argentina I believe has more to do with people being exposed to high concentration of Roundup in the air or the water, and I believe this is the reason why this man in particular refuses to drink the product.

 

I suggest being cold and objective when investigating all topics, nothing is usually black or white. More like grey I would say. One could also say that Roundup approaches the problem of overpopulation (controversially so) in more than one way.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
blue_devil's picture

This guy is such a fucking hipocrite that i am starting to wonder if he has a mental problem because he contradicts himself on the very spot multiple times with no problem whatsoever and keeps going like he isn't really aware of the contradiction.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down