Episode-613- Listener Feedback on Genetically Modified Organisms — 25 Comments

  1. I think I heard Glenn Beck refer to GMO corn that is engineered for fuel, and has little-no nutritional value! No way that could go wrong, huh?

  2. Yeah. Ever heard of the pro GMO crowd of (probably FDA agents) disinformation shills for the new world order?

    I’m surprised how few people actually care if GMO, HFCS, MSG, aspartame, and other junk is in the food. They think you are a terrorist and will call 911 because they heard something and saw something. In ten years, we will be f’ed.

  3. Hello Everyone,

    I have to thank Jack for spending so much time on answering my question regarding the makeup of GMO vs non-GMO agricultural products. A LOT of information here. For example–I wasn’t aware that they used viruses to make these modifications. I thought this GMO manipulation was a super-accelerated (many generational) crossbreeding, rather than essentially violating the laws of nature by forcing something to combine that never Could naturally. Pretty creepy.

    I guess Jack is right about whether it matters if GMO products are inherently dangerous (due to whatever interaction we have with the genetic modifications) or just because of the chemical bath. I guess there’s no reason to have Round-up resistant corn if they aren’t going to use round-up on it.

    However, Jack’s later point–that infiltration of GMO corn via the wind might not be AS dangerous, because an organic farmer isn’t going to dump round-up on his crops, even if some of it blows into his non-GMO crop. I hope that’s the case.

    In any case–really interesting stuff.

  4. Jack was talking about double cropping and getting N from Soy. You don’t get much N fixing from a dead plant and you can’t run green stems through a harvester. Also most double crops in the Midwest with soy is with it following wheat so you don’t get any N fixing.

  5. hey jack – as i may represent a rare bit of overlap between TSP & the NPR program Fresh Air, i’ll note that the latter is broadcast on 450 radio stations in the U.S., and gets 4.5 million listeners weekly (and she’s a terrific interviewer). – jason

  6. Hey Jack, congrats on tackling this subject. You are a complex guy, with a mixture of left and right standpoints, making your position hard to buttonhole easily. The one issue you are adrift on is global climate change, perhaps the biggest threat to survival for all of us in the future. When I lived in Vegas, I watched with amazement as Lake Mead just dried up right in front of me, with barely a mention in the media. See the graph at

    The snowpack on the mountains is lessening every year, the Colorado river is unreliable, and the whole southwest of the US may be heading towards unlivable dustbowl status. Yes, you will alienate some of your audience if you start discussing this issue, because most of them are dimwits who are brainwashed by people like Glenn Beck and other stooges for Big Polluters, but we are looking to you, Jack, to have the ethical strength to stand up for what you know is right, and not just the dollar bill.

    • @fanboy,

      What you present is evidence that the climate changes. I have NEVER claimed otherwise. How much water is in Lake Mead is more about water use than climate change though.

      Repeat after me, “the climate changes and it always has, the climate changes and it always has”.

      In short there is massive evidence of climate change form the dawn of the earth till today. There is no real evidence that CO2 is the cause, it is a fabrication designed to delude dumbasses into signing over sovereignty at a global level and make rich people richer.

      For the love of God a GRAPH IS NOT EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING. Having worked in Marketing and Sales for years I can tell you NOTHING is more simple to manipulate and create the story you want form than a graph.

      • Jack, you are sadly mistaken on this. I urge you to listen to these podcasts in your free time. Start listening to the scientists and not the conservative, pro-industry lobbyists. I’m only bothering to tell you this because I like you, Jack.

        • Just to underline my point for Jack, listen to this Max Keiser podcast in which Barry Ritholtz talks about the profit motive in global warming skepticism (it’s quite a way into the podcast, but it’s all interesting, so enjoy).

        • @fanboy preach your Global Warming crap elsewhere, I have done the research on both sides and I am DONE with it. Believe this bullshit if you want to.

      • OR, you could watch this, and be entertained.

        It is clear that the strategy of the Global warming…oh wait, Climate Change advocates is to double down and keep insisting that the same politically determined “solutions” are necessary, despite science, not due to it. Just keep attacking anyone who disagrees with you, and insisting you are right.

        At a minimum, one should be skeptical of advocates’ demands, when they rely so heavily on declarations, attempts to suppress data that doesn’t support their views, and the fact that they’ve built elaborate wealth transfer schemes that enrich themselves at massive cost to the taxpayer (while whining about “industry lobbyists.”).

        If the blatant hypocrisy displayed by the “leaders” in the global warming advocacy camp doesn’t raise some red flags, then I question the of these believers thinking.

        Global Warming advocates have engaged in decades long propaganda efforts to intimidate, scare and indoctrinate people into accepting their edicts, while engaging in dubious “scientific” practices, and denying anything that disagrees with them.

        Everyone should beware of any movement that engages in such extensive propaganda efforts, declarations, and attempts to silence dissent. Add in the fact that Global warming alarmism is highly politicized, and you’ve got a very clear reason for skepticism.

        Or, you can accept a one-sided, politically motivated propaganda campaign pretending to be science, and deeply intertwined with money-stealing schemes.

      • Having lived in Vegas for years and traveled up along the Colorado River many times, I can say for sure the flow rates are definitely down – it’s not just usage in Vegas that is the problem. However that does NOT mean it’s due to man-made global warming climate change. As Jack says, the climate changes all the time. Believe the man-made bullshit argument if you want.

        As an aside, IMHO unsustainable cities such as Phoenix & Vegas will become ghost towns in the coming decades. Glad to be out.

        • @metaforge unfortunately I completely agree with you about cities like Phoenix, Vegas and dare I say L.A. If not ghost towns a very small remnant of what they are today.

  7. Hey Jack, great show, really made me think. Three things that came to my mind are: 1. in medical terms a miscarriage is a spontaneous abortion; 2. i remember the old Parkay ad tagline: “Its not nice to fool Mother Nature.” and 3. we can’t put the genie back in the bottle. Keep up the great work.

  8. The phrase “spontaneous abortion” has been used in medical and veterinary circles for many decades (going back to at least the 1940’s if not the 1800’s). If I recall correctly (and I might be recalling this one wrong, so take the reliability of my memory with a grain of salt) a “miscarriage” is a term used for when the mother’s body rejects the fetus for “inner” medical reasons such as the fetus is developing incorrectly –essentially, something inside the mother’s body “decides” to jettison an unhealthy fetus for the sake of preserving the mother’s life. But a “spontaneous abortion” is when a situation that originates completely outside the mother’s body (a trauma or poison, etc.) disrupts an otherwise healthy pregnancy and the fetus is lost. The phrase “spontaneous abortion” is not used very much anymore, mostly due to the ongoing abortion controversy in our society. Meanwhile, whenever a doctor from many decades back attended to a no-longer-pregnant woman who had lost just her baby, he was obligated to make the determination as to whether or not the baby was lost due to a “miscarriage” (internal factors) or a “spontaneous abortion” (external factors). But now adays, all cases of a naturally jettisoned human fetus are simply termed “miscarriage” due to the political hot-button that the word “abortion” has become. So it’s a rather “old-fashioned” term suggesting that the medicine/scientist person who wrote the article might be from a much older generation (or he deals only with veterinary science and therefore deals only with animal pregnancies where the phrase “spontaneous abortion” isn’t so reviled). Regardless of whether or not the person who wrote that letter is an old-timer or not, IF I have correctly recalled the original definitions of those two medical terms, then that means the language being used in that letter from that Perdue scientist is language trying to point toward external factors briging about the needless loss of otherwise healthy fetuses.

  9. Jack, I find your comment to me above (“preach your global warming crap elsewhere”) highly offensive. That’s one less listener, hombre. I’ll be back to laugh at you when you finally change your tune on this, you moron. Like we should listen to you, a scientifically uneducated ex-salesman and wannabe homesteader, who gets his information from rightwing talk radio and other non-scientific sources? Bah! You say you have done the research on both sides, but in the world of SCIENCE, unlike your fantasy world of loudmouth radio, there is only one side, and that is that anthropogenic global warming is real and serious.

    Sigh, why am I wasting my time with aments like you? Bye bye, motormouth.

    • @fanboy I am sure you will be missed but I think we will survive without you. This is exactly the issue with true believers in the global warming cult they can’t stand to have anyone oppose their view.

      Be offended, but you have been badgering me with this same song for months. So I told you to stop wasting your breath, you then have to result to an actual insult.

      So yes go preach your global warming bullshit elsewhere because that is what I know it to be. Lastly science does once again not equal a graph.

      The sad thing most of us that know global warming is a scam still do more to positively impact the environment then most of the cult ever will.

      Tell me this though, oh wise one, how can anyone claim to value real science, then make this statement about something as complex as the climate, “there is only one side”. That statement speaks to your lack of understanding of what science actually is.

      • Lol… sometimes you just gotta shake your head. Hopefully fanboy goes & starts his own podcast: Cult of Climate Change. He can be high priest and force his views down upon everyone from on high.

        Great show today by the way, Jack.

    • Fanboy:

      Thanks you so much for demonstrating the irrational mindset that so many global warming believers have.

      …but in the world of SCIENCE, unlike your fantasy world of loudmouth radio, there is only one side,

      Wow, what an utterance of ridiculous proportion. Science has only one side. You’d have to be really detatched from reality to think that’s true. Unfortunately, this isn’t unique amongst global warming adherents.

      For everyone else–really valuable lessons here from this person. Notice how they like Jack at first, and then suddenly, he is a “loudmouth moron”–and why? Simply because he disagrees with this person’s demand to believe what he believes.

      Now imagine this person if they are ever forced to face reality. Imagine that irrational mindset in a crisis. Scary, scary stuff.


    • It’s a Planet!
      It gets HOT!
      It gets COLD!
      It gets WET!
      It gets DRY!
      The Climate has CHANGED thousands of times over the past million years.
      In fact, the moon moving 1.5 inches further away each year has more to do with our climate changing than anything we puny humans could do.
      One major volcano exploding can affect the temperature of the earth & several exploding in one year would devastate the planet. So I guess you better find a way to bleed off those nasty volcano’s before they explode!!!

  10. Jack, you mentioned a fungal virus. Since they are using fish to infuse these GMO’s, I would speculate an hypotheses. Fish are very much affected by fungi. Anyone who has had fish in a tank has to worry about this.
    Would in not be possible that a fungi infected fish used in the GMO infusing process could have caused this cross mutation?

    Something to really think about, isn’t it!

  11. Hey, That I.Q. Test was first introduced at the Unemployment office.
    Those that failed the test are the ones that got hired!!

    Perhaps we should require that ALL politicians must memorize & then recite the Declaration, Constitution & Bill of Rights before being allowed to take the oath of office.
    This would cut down on all those Libs running for office, it would take too much effort on their part & they would find an easier way to steal, I mean earn money!!!

  12. Great book explaining the GMO subject is Seeds of Deception by Jeffery Smith. It goes into all the virus gene gun shooting stuff that Jack refers to. Great book. My head hurt so much from shaking it in disbelief. God help us all.
    Just the book:
    ISBN-10: 0972966587
    ISBN-13: 978-0972966580

    Don’t forget to go to amazon thru Jack’s link!