http://www.sfgate.com/business/inves...-t-4610976.php I have been saying this for ages. Also DuPont had the non drug hemp criminalized because it did not need all the nasty chemicals that cotton does. Furthermore, the held patents to CFC's but when the patents were about to expire CFC's became dangerous. Maybe all the GM companies are using Monsanto as a whipping boy to divert attention form what all the rest of them are doing.
I think the point is - when was the last thread made about DuPont? How often do you hear people here talk about DuPont compared to Monsanto? Where are the endless reams of information / boycots / protests etc etc regarding duPont? https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=b...060,d.ZWU&fp=f81fa5c27f0b1a7e&biw=930&bih=640 https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=DuPont&oq=DuPont&aqs=chrome.0.57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Spot the difference. Perhaps the point isn't Dupont isn't - you just would not know by the imbalance between the two.
We get what he means. I think our point is: If you want a good discussion, don't start it off with a logical fallacy in the title.
Lol, sorry, I just read the article. Fair enough. I don't think the title of the article/thread is a monumental hurdle to get over. We get the point - move on.
