Support NeoGAF

[User 406]

What's everyone's favorite Clintonsouls build?

That's a tough one, you'd want high VIT and FAI (love and kindness), high ADP for obvious reasons, high END for Benghazi Committee hearings, high INT and ATN for policy wonkishness and breadth, Soul Spears to pierce enemies' underprepared arguments, Dark Fog to cover up questionable activities, various healing miracles, and Denial, of course. Flash Sweat would be right out tho, she doesn't sweat. So I guess a hybrid sorceries/miracles/hexes caster with some wasted points in ADP?

Of course, she'll just wear the Tseldora set, since it's all yellow and boring and gives her extra souls courtesy of Wall Street donors.

 

[brainchild]

I don't give a shit how many labels you want to put on a product, as long as they're accurate. If they wanna label corn too, be my guest.

It seems that some people have a difficult time compartmentalizing issues in this thread (and other places). It makes no logical fucking sense that accurately labeling a food is against science. NONE. It's like arguing that 2 + 2 != 4 because it would cause widespread panic.

Now, you're more than welcome to attack the VERY RIDICULOUS notion that GMOs are bad for you, but labeling a GMO food as a GMO food is no more inherently anti-science than providing ingredients on the label of a product.

I'm so, so tired of the strawmen, btw. The fact that there are posters who believe that Bernie or myself are promoting the anti-science agenda of GMO fearmongering just because we believe that Americans have the right to have more information provided about the products that they consume if that's what they're asking for shows either an extreme deficit in critical thinking skills, or they're just trolling.

And it's embarrassing to see these kinds of comments because it reflects poorly on the competence of the scientific community.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I'm not sure why the question posed is "Why shouldn't gun manufacturers have especially enshrined protections against legal liability?" Instead of why should they? When few industries do. In the WaPo annotations the only other one I remember is vaccines, with a clear purpose.

Also I don't know what brought about the GMO labelling rant. But no, it is anti-science, it is driven by leftist fear mongering, and it is pointless nonsense as idiotic as labelling foods with their percentage DNA content. I don't care who does it. If Clinton does the same. If Obama calls for it. Still anti-science fear mongering nonsense.

See this snowball, where's your global warming now?

 

[Fox318]

Clinton is hinting strongly for the first time that she'd like Bernie to drop out: https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/707007409269690368

Bernie shouldn't drop out until the convention or until he has lost without the super del count.

 

[User 463088]

Posted?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432464/correction-cruz-senate-endorsements

LMAO

REDACTED

Bless his heart.

 

[aspiegamer]

Damn, Hillary killed it on FOX. Their hosts aren't necessarily bad people when they get to write their own scripts. There's still some desire for journalism down in those souls, and they're probably a bit humbled to get to host someone like Clinton in that kind of setting. Except Hannity. Screw Hannity.

Perhaps this entire primary process has humbled Ailes? That his will alone is no longer enough for a narrative? That just an oldschool echo chamber can't drive policy? Actually, like, letting staff do their thing on their own might be a deliberate strategy? ...Yeah no. But I'll still dream about it.

 

[Tubie]

Likely delegate count before Ohio and Florida:

Ohio and Florida are crucial if you're planning on a contested convention.

I don't think Trumps wins either FL or OH, so I guess he's done. Brokered convention fuckery it is.

The KKK thing really was the thing that killed all his momentum, and I bet it also cost him a lot of potential endorsements.

 

[metalslimer]

Bernie shouldn't drop out until the convention or until he has lost without the super del count.

If he is massively behind and has lost with the supers he really should drop out. Honestly I would prefer he drop out in April.

 

[Thoraxes]

I don't think Trumps wins either FL or OH, so I guess he's done. Brokered convention fuckery it is.

The KKK thing really was the thing that killed all his momentum, and I bet it also cost him a lot of potential endorsements.

In Illinois, the only attack ads I've seen so far are Rubio ads against Trump, and they only bring up the KKK thing.

 

[RoKKeR]

The Trump advisor CNN puts on is obnoxious as fuck. Also his face NEVER changes. He hardly blinks. It's freaking me out.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

I'm not sure why the question posed is "Why shouldn't gun manufacturers have especially enshrined protections against legal liability?" Instead of why should they? When few industries do. In the WaPo annotations the only other one I remember is vaccines, with a clear purpose.

The Politifact article also mentions that Telecom companies are protected against liability if they fail to stop illegal activity taking place online.

As I said, emotions will tend to run high in the wake of gun-caused deaths, but given that guns are a Constitutionally-enshrined right and therefore legal to market and sell, it seems reasonable that the circumstances under which they can be sued be enshrined, rather than allowing them to be hammered from unconventional directions due to the legal prohibition against sensible gun laws.

 

[Macho Madness]

TED IS A MESS

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I don't give a shit how many labels you want to put on a product, as long as they're accurate. If they wanna label corn too, be my guest.

It seems that some people have a difficult time compartmentalizing issues in this thread (and other places). It makes no logical fucking sense that accurately labeling a food is against science. NONE. It's like arguing that 2 + 2 != 4 because it would cause widespread panic.

Now, you're more than welcome to attack the VERY RIDICULOUS notion that GMOs are bad for you, but labeling a GMO food as a GMO food is no more inherently anti-science than providing ingredients on the label of a product.

I'm so, so tired of the strawmen, btw. The fact that there are posters who believe that Bernie or myself are promoting the anti-science agenda of GMO fearmongering just because we believe that Americans have the right to have more information provided about the products that they consume if that's what they're asking for shows either an extreme deficit in critical thinking skills, or they're just trolling.

And it's embarrassing to see these kinds of comments because it reflects poorly on the competence of the scientific community.

It's not the act itself, it's the justification; why are we talking about labeling GMO foods? The only reason is because some people are concerned that eating GMO foods is somehow unhealthy, a position that is not supported by science. If the only justification for labeling is to appease an anti-science perspective, then, yes, the act itself becomes anti-science as there's no other basis for labeling GMO products. And it's an especially ridiculous stance as there are dozens of food companies that loudly and proudly proclaim their products are GMO-free, so it's not like anti-GMO people don't have options.

 

[danm999]

TED IS A MESS

This one is too gross for me.

 

[Retromelon]

I beat earthbound beginnings recently and I think its beating metroid now for my favorite nes game. The combat is as barebones and archaic as it gets, but everything else raises the bar. The music in this game is fantastic, the story is minimalist yet heartfelt, the atmosphere is soooo good (wait til you get to mt. Itoi) and the difficulty is stupid. You will want to be save stating every 3 steps sometimes...but it was worth it to see it through
In conclusion 7.8/10 - just right amount of water

 

[Macho Madness]

This one is too gross for me.

Ted is a mess.

 

[Bowdz]

TED IS A MESS

Booger eatin Ted.

 

[johnsmith]

I beat earthbound beginnings recently and I think its beating metroid now for my favorite nes game. The combat is as barebones and archaic as it gets, but everything else raises the bar. The music in this game is fantastic, the story is minimalist yet heartfelt, the atmosphere is soooo good (wait til you get to mt. Itoi) and the difficulty is stupid. You will want to be save stating every 3 steps sometimes...but it was worth it to see it through
In conclusion 7.8/10 - just right amount of water

Pokey = Trump

 

[Kangi]

I beat earthbound beginnings recently and I think its beating metroid now for my favorite nes game. The combat is as barebones and archaic as it gets, but everything else raises the bar. The music in this game is fantastic, the story is minimalist yet heartfelt, the atmosphere is soooo good (wait til you get to mt. Itoi) and the difficulty is stupid. You will want to be save stating every 3 steps sometimes...but it was worth it to see it through
In conclusion 7.8/10 - just right amount of water

Mt. Itoi was very literally unbalanced. As in, they never got around to balancing it at all.

But yes, it's a fantastic game that's tragically overlooked since its sequel essentially does what it does, but better. And you should really not get me started on the MOTHER series in this thread because I will never stop talking about it.

Pokey = Trump

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4cUYDJmcns

 

[sangreal]

I don't give a shit how many labels you want to put on a product, as long as they're accurate. If they wanna label corn too, be my guest.

It seems that some people have a difficult time compartmentalizing issues in this thread (and other places). It makes no logical fucking sense that accurately labeling a food is against science. NONE. It's like arguing that 2 + 2 != 4 because it would cause widespread panic.

Now, you're more than welcome to attack the VERY RIDICULOUS notion that GMOs are bad for you, but labeling a GMO food as a GMO food is no more inherently anti-science than providing ingredients on the label of a product.

I'm so, so tired of the strawmen, btw. The fact that there are posters who believe that Bernie or myself are promoting the anti-science agenda of GMO fearmongering just because we believe that Americans have the right to have more information provided about the products that they consume if that's what they're asking for shows either an extreme deficit in critical thinking skills, or they're just trolling.

And it's embarrassing to see these kinds of comments because it reflects poorly on the competence of the scientific community.

It's not the same at all as listing ingredients because the ingredients are actually material information -- eg for allergies. Meanwhile the scientific consensus is that there is no significance to food using GMOs and you are suggesting ignoring that consensus and attaching arbitrary significance to it. That's why it is anti-science

 

[A Human Becoming]

Wow that comment about white people not being poor and in the ghetto Bernie said last night was as bad as people here said.

 

[B-Dubs]

Wow that comment about white people not being poor and in the ghetto Bernie said last night was as bad as people said here.

You should see the clarification, it somehow managed to be even worse.

 

[Zona]

PoliGAF 2016 |OT3| We Know PollOptics

 

[brainchild]

It's not the act itself, it's the justification; why are we talking about labeling GMO foods? The only reason is because some people are concerned that eating GMO foods is somehow unhealthy, a position that is not supported by science. If the only justification for labeling is to appease an anti-science perspective, then, yes, the act itself becomes anti-science as there's no other basis for labeling GMO products. And it's an especially ridiculous stance as there are dozens of food companies that loudly and proudly proclaim their products are GMO-free, so it's not like anti-GMO people don't have options.

I'm only talking about the act itself. If the majority of the American people want it (and it appears that they do), and they have the right to know this information, then that should be the end of the story.

Lots of people just want to know if the composition of their food is the result completely natural processes, or if it has been tampered with, and their curiosity isn't necessarily tied to fear that the tampering will harm them.

The facts are that the anti-science agenda with GMOs is NOT the only reason that consumers want GMO foods to be labeled as such, so we can't definitively conclude that labeling GMO foods would be anti-science.

 

[johnsmith]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4cUYDJmcns

This is incredible.

 

[B-Dubs]

God, I love Sam Bee's show. The fact this isn't daily is killing me, she's constantly killing it.

 

[A Human Becoming]

You should see the clarification, it somehow managed to be even worse.

Was that after the debate?

God, I love Sam Bee's show. The fact this isn't daily is killing me, she's constantly killing it.

So it got better after the first episode? Premiere only gave me a few laughs.

 

[brainchild]

It's not the same at all as listing ingredients because the ingredients are actually material information -- eg for allergies. Meanwhile the scientific consensus is that there is no significance to food using GMOs and you are suggesting ignoring that consensus and attaching arbitrary significance to it. That's why it is anti-science

Of course they're not the same, but similarly, neither are inherently anti-science.

And there is quite the significance SCIENTIFICALLY between GMO foods and non-GMO foods. This isn't even debatable. There just isn't any significance of health risk to the consumers. However, that doesn't mean that the consumers don't have the right to know if the food has been modified on the molecular level or not.

 

[B-Dubs]

Was that after the debate?

Oh yes

 

[Box of Kittens]

I think the most embarrassing in this whole thing is the state of Wisconsin for voting that joke Walker governor TWICE.

Technically three times. The recall was a somewhat unusual circumstance though.

Speaking of Walker, his recent appointee to the State Supreme Court is somehow even more terrible than I'd expect.

 

[A Human Becoming]

Oh yes

Yeah I know what he was trying to say, people like to equate ghettos to African American communities, but he worded it poorly. It's like how thug is used.

 

[Orbis Tabula]

The only possible title for the next thread is PoliGAF |OT3| I guarantee you there's no problem. I guarantee.

It was absolutely the moment of the election. I mean, maybe I could accept something about short-fingered vulgarians, but I think the real choice is clear. Big Don's Big Dong. The Schlong Form Girth Certificate.

 

[shinra-bansho]

Selective breeding is a form of genetic modification. The mechanisms that introduce foreign DNA if one refers more specifically exists au naturale, except in an uncontrolled manner.

And the majority of Americans want to know if there's DNA in their food via labelling. Because they're laypeople and acronyms are scary.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

PoliGAF |OT3| Little Marco and Lyin' Ted's Excellent Convention

 

[brainchild]

Selective breeding is a form of genetic modification. The mechanisms that introduce foreign DNA if one refers more specifically exists au naturale, except in an uncontrolled manner.

And the majority of Americans want to know if there's DNA in their food via labelling. Because they're laypeople and acronyms are scary.

Absolutely. And if a label provides Americans with that additional information, that isn't anti-science. That was my point.

 

[Diablos]

PoliGAF |OT3| Little Marco and Lyin' Ted's Excellent Convention

Wow, this is great. I vote in favor of this.

 

[B-Dubs]

Absolutely. And if a label provides Americans with that additional information, that isn't anti-science. That was my point.

The only reason people want it is because they think GMO's are bad. If anything we should be pushing back against that, not coddling their ignorance. Labeling plays into that fear. We should be calling these people morons, not embracing their idiocy.

 

[brainchild]

The only reason people want it is because they think GMO's are bad. If anything we should be pushing back against that, not coddling their ignorance. Labeling plays into that fear. We should be calling these people morons, not embracing their idiocy.

You can still provide the labels and fight against that narrative.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes

Also, you can't speak for every American and say that them wanting GMO labels is based on the anti-science agenda.

 

[Allard]

Absolutely. And if a label provides Americans with that additional information, that isn't anti-science. That was my point.

Its superfluous artificial information designed to create a negative narrative despite scientific consensus is they are literally no different from each other. Its not additional information, its specifically designed to hurt scientific breakthroughs for greed and the fact you think you need to know that shows you have fallen for it too.

 

[Snowman Prophet of Doom]

The only reason people want it is because they think GMO's are bad. If anything we should be pushing back against that, not coddling their ignorance. Labeling plays into that fear. We should be calling these people morons, not embracing their idiocy.

I mean, to give a slight amount of credence to the silly side, nobody really knows if they might turn out to have an effect on health on a 50+-year time scale, which some people absolutely do conceive of their diet in, so I don't necessarily think it's unreasonable to ask that the packaging be labeled if people want to be that careful with their eating. Moreover, some people might be politically anti-GMO, in terms of large companies being able to patent gene sequences, so I could see an argument that the label also facilitates peoples' ability to make an informed decision on that front.

 

[RustyNails]

PoliGAF |OT3| Little Marco and Lyin' Ted's Excellent Convention

Trump should call Rubio a joker and Cruz a clown, and then bust out that line from Steeler's wheels song.

 

[Makai]

You can still provide the labels and fight against that narrative.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes

Also, you can't speak for every American and say that them wanting GMO labels is based on the anti-science agenda.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97567

Barely more than a third of the public believes that genetically modified foods are safe to eat. Instead 52 percent believe such foods are unsafe, and an additional 13 percent are unsure about them. That's broad doubt on the very basic issue of food safety.

 

[brainchild]

Its superfluous artificial information designed to create a negative narrative despite scientific consensus is they are literally no different from each other. Its not additional information, its specifically designed to hurt scientific breakthroughs for greed and the fact you think you need to know that shows you have fallen for it too.

Genetic modification is not 'superfluous artificial information'. Are you serious? It is a very real and scientifically documented process. It also happens in nature.

And personally, I don't care about GMOs. I'm not asking for the label, I'm just supporting the will of the people, so you can leave your strawman at the door.

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97567

And this changes nothing that I said. Not one iota.

 

[A Human Becoming]

PoliGAF |OT3| Little Marco and Lyin' Ted's Excellent Convention

I like it, but maybe not this next one. Let's see how things turn out.

Debates are so much better when people from the audience ask questions and the moderators have facts/information in front of them.

 

[BoboBrazil]

Lol this group tried to extort 1 million bucks from Trump. He didn't give it to them and now they are running attack ads against him for Cruz. Trump posted the letter

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/images/uploads/DJT.Club_For_Growth.2015_06_021.pdf

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/272013-club-for-growth-action-spends-2-million-on-anti-trump-ads

 

[Atomic Playboy]

You can still provide the labels and fight against that narrative.

Only a Sith deals in absolutes

Also, you can't speak for every American and say that them wanting GMO labels is based on the anti-science agenda.

What other rationale is there for labeling GMO food though? Are people really that interested in the science that they want to be absolutely sure that their food has gone through GMO processes designed to increase the viability of crop yields? The implication behind labeling is "we have the right to know because GMO foods might be harmful." That's not scientifically supported, hence why people are branding this notion as "anti-science." I mean, as long as we're requiring disclosure of information, let's require labels to list the names and contact information for every single person who tilled the soil, planted the seeds, watered the land, harvested the crops, processed the foodstuffs and packaged the finished product. Sure, it doesn't have any bearing on the actual contents of the package, but I deserve to know every single person who came in contact with my Hot Pocket before it found it's way into my mouth.

 

[brainchild]

As an example of something that can counter the anti-science narrative of GMOs while still providing the labels, we can make it so that the labels say something to the effect of "currently there is no evidence that indicates that GMOs are harmful for human consumption, this label is purely for your information".

Obviously it wouldn't be worded exactly like that, but that is just ONE example in how you could label GMO foods without being anti-science.

 

[shinra-bansho]

I think this is the third time I've posted it now, but "the will of the people" think that DNA in food should require a special label. I could probably get the will of the people to oppose the presence of C2H6O in wine.

Because the people are idiots.

 

[hawk2025]

As an example of something that can counter the anti-science narrative of GMOs while still providing the labels, we can make it so that the labels say something to the effect of "currently there is no evidence that indicates that GMOs are harmful for human consumption, this label is purely for your information".

Obviously it wouldn't be worded exactly like that, but that is just ONE example in how you could label GMO foods without being anti-science.

I mean, sure.

But that's somewhat like -- and I regret this analogy already, but I'm going to run with it -- to adding a chapter on Intelligent Design to a Science book with a disclaimer that it doesn't have any actual scientific evidence.

It can be there, but why?

There are so many labels we can add first that would have significant, positive impacts on consumption. Why not increase the size of the Trans Fat and Sodium amounts on packaging instead of having a pointless GMO label?

It's not about the fact that it can be harmless with the proper warning that there's no science to support it. It's the fact that our resources are limited and we would pursue that instead of other things in precious packaging real estate.

 

[brainchild]

What other rationale is there for labeling GMO food though? Are people really that interested in the science that they want to be absolutely sure that their food has gone through GMO processes designed to increase the viability of crop yields? The implication behind labeling is "we have the right to know because GMO foods might be harmful." That's not scientifically supported, hence why people are branding this notion as "anti-science." I mean, as long as we're requiring disclosure of information, let's require labels to list the names and contact information for every single person who tilled the soil, planted the seeds, watered the land, harvested the crops, processed the foodstuffs and packaged the finished product. Sure, it doesn't have any bearing on the actual contents of the package, but I deserve to know every single person who came in contact with my Hot Pocket before it found it's way into my mouth.

Curiosity? Uncertainty? There could be lots of reasons and they shouldn't be dismissed because of the anti-science agenda. We have to deal with both issues, not deal in ultimatums.