Penn & Teller Bull Organic Food

[SunSamurai]

Phokus.pdf

lol On the other hand, please stay, I like watching you get owned over and over.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: swbsam
sigh, why must neo-cons keep this shit up? don't like organic? DON'T BUY IT.. If you can afford to spend extra on higher quality then, well, why shouldn't you be allowed to? Penn and teller are obnoxious tools who selectively chose their "experts" - the experts on their sides are people who have their shit together, while the 'liberals' are always raging idiots..

Terrible, terrible show...

And bottled water is awesome - I'm so glad that it's caught on, vs. drinking from spit covered, warm, rust tasting public drinking fountains when out and about.

I'm not a "neo-con." I'm not even a con. I'm libertarian. So are Penn and Teller.

We're followers of objectivity.

Way to make yourself one of those "raging idiot" liberals. You can't even tell the HUGE difference between conservatism and libertarianism.

BTW, a lot of right wing nutjobs follow the "organic" movement too, right along with the anti-vaccination movement. The further a person goes out on either "wing" the more likely they are to buy into fringe crap like "Organic" and be religious about it.

ROFL ROFL ROFL

You discount science in favor of anecdotal 'evidence', you're the LAST person who should claim 'objectivity' :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Trolling again I see and chasing me to yet another thread.

Nope, just calling out your ignorance yet again. The fact that you think 'libertarians = objectivity' is hilarious. If you were objective, you would acknowledge scientific facts when it DOESN'T suit your agenda. Instead, you throw out science in favor of anecdotal evidence when you hit the cognitive dissonance wall.

 

[Hacp]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: zerocool84
Well Phokus is here so it's going to get locked.

he even signed a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide.

Can you blame him? It's a well-known fact that terrorist organizations always keep a supply of DHMO.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Citrix


FYI i am not a part of the republican party so fuck you too.

This coming from the guy who's equating conservativism and being a republican now? :laugh:

Funny, i thought the argument these days were that republicans weren't really conservative, after GWBush and his republican cronies increased the size and scope of government :laugh:

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Iron Woode

Originally posted by: zerocool84
Well Phokus is here so it's going to get locked.

he even signed a petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide.

Can you blame him? It's a well-known fact that terrorist organizations always keep a supply of DHMO.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Originally posted by: ZeGermans

Originally posted by: Hacp

So basically you're ok with the free market keeping black people impoverished.

Poor black people are poor cause they choose to be poor. They choose not to do well in school. Instead, they'll go steal some cars and smoke some weed with their friends. Instead of spending the nights studying, they'll party all night: then, when the F comes in, they'll complain that the teacher was bad at teaching the subject.

If you go into a job interview dressed in street clothes talking slang, then no, you won't get a job. However, if you go in dressed appropriately while speaking to the interviewer in clear and concise English, then you have as much of a chance as anybody does.

ahahaha get the fuck out you racist piece of shit

P.S. i don't sign petitions

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: SunSamurai
Phokus.pdf

lol On the other hand, please stay, I like watching you get owned over and over.

Just go to P&N. It really does brighten my day when foot meets mouth.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: Phokus
Nope, just calling out your ignorance yet again. The fact that you think 'libertarians = objectivity' is hilarious. If you were objective, you would acknowledge scientific facts when it DOESN'T suit your agenda. Instead, you throw out science in favor of anecdotal evidence when you hit the cognitive dissonance wall.

I believe he's referring to objectivism as put forth by Rand.

 

[Kirby]

Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

This is basically a P&N thread you dipshit. Why the mods haven't moved it there is a mystery.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: Phokus
Nope, just calling out your ignorance yet again. The fact that you think 'libertarians = objectivity' is hilarious. If you were objective, you would acknowledge scientific facts when it DOESN'T suit your agenda. Instead, you throw out science in favor of anecdotal evidence when you hit the cognitive dissonance wall.

I believe he's referring to objectivism as put forth by Rand.

Then he would say, 'we're followers of objectivism', not 'we're followers of objectivity'.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

This is basically a P&N thread you dipshit. Why the mods haven't moved it there is a mystery.

No it isn't. Get your ass ready for some tyranny of the majority. Wrong or not, we're right! Now get the fuck out of off topic.

 

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

This is basically a P&N thread you dipshit. Why the mods haven't moved it there is a mystery.

Then how about you save us the misery and just wait for it to be moved?

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: nkgreen

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

This is basically a P&N thread you dipshit. Why the mods haven't moved it there is a mystery.

Then how about you save us the misery and just wait for it to be moved?

Can't, I feed on the cognitive dissonance and irrationality of the rest of you

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: nkgreen

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: nkgreen
Phuckus, please contain your shit to P&N. You have an extraordinary ability to transform any thread into hot baby diarrhea.

This is basically a P&N thread you dipshit. Why the mods haven't moved it there is a mystery.

Then how about you save us the misery and just wait for it to be moved?

Can't, I feed on the cognitive dissonance and irrationality of the rest of you

I love how it feels when you put my cognitive dissonance in your mouth, baby.

 

[Arkaign]

(1)- Trying to make a substantive statement about the entirety of all 'organic' food, and package it into a TV special, is by design a limited and oversimplified undertaking. Organic food, individually, may either be legitimate or bullshit. There are tens of thousands of different companies, distributors, varieties of food, and reasons for or against the 'organic' treatment. I'm pretty sure that a lot of the organic food industry are just people cashing in on a fad, and with no legitimate differences between conventional industrial food production. I'm also sure that some of it is indeed legitimate, as I've had direct experience with free-range grass-fed organic longhorn beef ranches. Let me tell you, that beef is some of the tastiest, healthiest beef you can possibly imagine, and it actually has Omega-3 fatty acids (lab proven), whereas the corn-fed standard industrial beef lacks that beneficial element.

(2)- Penn & Teller are entertainers, their job #1 is to make money for themselves and their producers. They do this by being interesting, and by being deliberately controversial. To strike upon a hot-button issue is paydirt for them, and makes for good viewing IMHO. Ask yourself, what's more entertaining .. a well-qualified reasonable debate with appropriate experts with a wide variety in perspective .. or a comedic ambush using hand-picked morons on one side, and some 'experts' on one side who merely make flat statements without examining any of the complexities of the issue?

(3)- Quality varies widely with almost any consumable product ever made. At the end of the day, one should be responsible for educating themselves with as much accuracy as the subject or item demands, so that an understanding can be reached to make good decisions about what you put into your body.

(4)- Nothing is perfect.

(5)- This issue should rightfully be apolitical.

(6)- The varieties of food and food production / distribution / etc, are so wildly varied that it's obscenely idiotic to label an entire industry as either 'bullshit' or 'legitimate', when the facts support a lot of both, but you MUST get granular with the data to discern that.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Can't, I feed on the cognitive dissonance and irrationality of the rest of you

If you ate some of our intelligence you probably wouldn't know what to do with yourself. You'd start crying in the corner of your sillly little troll cave. Congratulations on using big words though, I bet people point and laugh at you in real life.

 

[torpid]

The episode touched on some good topics but did not dig deep enough. While organic farms could still use antiquated pesticides, many will not. There is a large spectrum involved. Some farms refuse to use any pesticide at all, and some use them only in dire circumstances. Some use them all of the time. It would have been cooler if they followed the tomato back to its source and saw the actual pesticide being sprayed, thereby leading to the reasonable conclusion that organic means nothing if you don't know the source of your food and can't verify their practices.

 

[Arkaign]

Originally posted by: torpid
The episode touched on some good topics but did not dig deep enough. While organic farms could still use antiquated pesticides, many will not. There is a large spectrum involved. Some farms refuse to use any pesticide at all, and some use them only in dire circumstances. Some use them all of the time. It would have been cooler if they followed the tomato back to its source and saw the actual pesticide being sprayed, thereby leading to the reasonable conclusion that organic means nothing if you don't know the source of your food and can't verify their practices.

:thumbsup:

I think the episode raised some good points and was of course entertaining, but the very limited scale of research and analysis did a great disservice to individuals looking for some substantive debate.

Education/Research >>>>>>>>>> TV Show in search of support for a predetermined and oversimplistic 'conclusion'.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: torpid
The episode touched on some good topics but did not dig deep enough. While organic farms could still use antiquated pesticides, many will not. There is a large spectrum involved. Some farms refuse to use any pesticide at all, and some use them only in dire circumstances. Some use them all of the time. It would have been cooler if they followed the tomato back to its source and saw the actual pesticide being sprayed, thereby leading to the reasonable conclusion that organic means nothing if you don't know the source of your food and can't verify their practices.

:thumbsup:

I think the episode raised some good points and was of course entertaining, but the very limited scale of research and analysis did a great disservice to individuals looking for some substantive debate.

Education/Research >>>>>>>>>> TV Show in search of support for a predetermined and oversimplistic 'conclusion'.

It's a 30 minute show meant to entertain.

 

[MrPickins]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Arkaign

Originally posted by: torpid
The episode touched on some good topics but did not dig deep enough. While organic farms could still use antiquated pesticides, many will not. There is a large spectrum involved. Some farms refuse to use any pesticide at all, and some use them only in dire circumstances. Some use them all of the time. It would have been cooler if they followed the tomato back to its source and saw the actual pesticide being sprayed, thereby leading to the reasonable conclusion that organic means nothing if you don't know the source of your food and can't verify their practices.

:thumbsup:

I think the episode raised some good points and was of course entertaining, but the very limited scale of research and analysis did a great disservice to individuals looking for some substantive debate.

Education/Research >>>>>>>>>> TV Show in search of support for a predetermined and oversimplistic 'conclusion'.

It's a 30 minute show meant to entertain.

And also to get people to think a bit. (and hopefully do some of their own research)

If nothing else, they do a great job of playing the devil's advocate.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Citrix


FYI i am not a part of the republican party so fuck you too.

This coming from the guy who's equating conservativism and being a republican now? :laugh:

Funny, i thought the argument these days were that republicans weren't really conservative, after GWBush and his republican cronies increased the size and scope of government :laugh:

you need a damn vacation for thread crapping. all of us are tired of your trolling.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: Phokus

Can't, I feed on the cognitive dissonance and irrationality of the rest of you

If you ate some of our intelligence you probably wouldn't know what to do with yourself. You'd start crying in the corner of your sillly little troll cave. Congratulations on using big words though, I bet people point and laugh at you in real life.

Lol, you think 'cognitive dissonance' = big words :laugh:

 

[Nik]

I love how here at AT you can't even talk about pirating games and software without having your thread locked and receive a ban. But you can post copyrighted material without a hitch. :thumbsup:

:roll:

 

[DangerAardvark]

Originally posted by: swbsam

Secondhand smoke

At The Amaz!ng Meeting 3 the duo was asked about the evidence for this episode being faulty. Penn Jillette, with Teller sitting at his side, said "What we talked about during the show was where the stuff was there", likely meaning that he was using the data that the government had when they instituted the ban, then said regarding this episode they were "very likely" wrong and the next season would add a notation, as of the end of season six they haven't. Penn went on to describe "a new study that came out of England, just recently, that seems to have more stuff about it" and "right now, as I sit here, there probably is danger in secondhand smoke." He went on to say that this was a small portion of the program, and their main point was their opposition to "outlawing" smoking in privately-owned businesses, which they still "stand behind 100%."[20]

Robert Todd Carroll, author of The Skeptic's Dictionary, originally sided with the show's conclusion that there was no link between secondhand smoke and cancer. But Carroll changed his conclusions after further investigation into the studies. Carroll concluded that the studies were biased, and consequently decided that secondhand smoke does have negative effects on people.[21]

Originally posted by: swbsam

During an interview on the January 31, 2007 episode of The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe, Teller claimed that the final episode of the show would be about "the bullshit of Bullshit!" and would detail all the criticisms that they themselves had of the show.[15]

You do realize that you're pointing out reason to like them even more, right? Willingness to admit you're wrong is admirable.

Originally posted by: swbsam
What makes them credible debunkers at all? They obviously have an agenda, and they're fucking magicians.

So debunk their debunking instead of whining about the source of the information. You're terrible at arguing.

 

[Nik]

Originally posted by: zerocool84

NO profanity in thread titles. asterisks do not count


esquared
Anandtech Senior Moderator

Oh really?

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...id=38&threadid=2324036

Yeah, really. Next time, post your whiny little complaint in personal forum issues, else PM a moderator. -DrPizza