Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Your favourite political cartoons CT satire and propaganda artwork.

24

Comments

  • #32
    kristopher_1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭kristopher_1


    King Mob wrote: »
    No, all vegetable have chemicals in them.
    It's what they are made out of.

    I thought we were discussing pesticides here, you do understand those are man made chemicals, yes?
    And produces less yield for no benefit at all.

    And then I assume that you would have no issue eating a nice big bowl of that or any other organic fertiliser then?

    Why would I eat a bowl of organic fertilizer?

    It isn't sprayed on the crop, you do understand what fertilizer is, don't you?


  • #33
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    I am referring to mass crop spraying techniques, pestilence and growth enhancing chemicals carried out by commercial growers. :rolleyes:
    But organic farmers also use these things, only less efficient ones from arbitrarily defined "organic" sources.

    If you want to seem to be making a reasonable post, don't use language that makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking.
    Just refering to "chemicals" as if that word was scary makes it seem like you don't understand basic science.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Yes you are correct, less efficient and more costly to produce and more expensive to buy but in the long run you make up for this in healthier living and cutting down family doctor bills by not getting sick
    This is not true. Organic foods have never been shown to be more healthy than non-organic food.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    and not requiring harmful mercury containing vaccinations. :)
    Yet more dishonesty and/or ignorance.
    Vaccines do not contain mercury.
    Non-organic foods do not cause any illness that is treated or prevented by vaccines.
    Eating organic food does not grant you the benefits of vaccines.


  • #34
    kristopher_1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭kristopher_1


    King Mob wrote:

    Just refering to "chemicals" as if that word was scary makes it seem like you
    don't understand basic science.

    You're just being pedantic and extremely overbearing...*yawn*


  • #35
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    I thought we were discussing pesticides here, you do understand those are man made chemicals, yes?
    As I said to Rtdhs, just using the scary word "chemicals" makes it look like you don't understand what they are.
    Now you'll have to define what the difference between man made chemicals and other chemicals is that makes one somehow always bad and evil.
    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    Why would I eat a bowl of organic fertilizer?
    It's the same question you asked me. If that fertilizer is safe, then you should have no issues eating it raw, right?
    Or is the question unfair somehow?
    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    It isn't sprayed on the crop, you do understand what fertilizer is, don't you?
    Yes, and organic farmers use both fertilizers and pesticides, just less efficient "natural" ones (consequently requiring more of both).


  • #36
    kristopher_1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭kristopher_1


    So what? That's already been accepted but you keep crying like a baby about it.

    The end product of proper organic farming is of superior quality.

    Of course growing vegetables the natural way takes more effort but I already indicated that several posts ago...you're not educating me about agriculture buddy in any way at all nor could you ever.

    I know people that grow food for years, I'm pretty sure they know more than you.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    So what? That's already been accepted but you keep crying like a baby about it.

    The end product of proper organic farming is of superior quality.

    Of course growing vegetables the natural way takes more effort but I already indicated that several posts ago...you're not educating me about agriculture buddy in any way at all nor could you ever.

    I know people that grow food for years, I'm pretty sure they know more than you.
    But that's not been shown. Organic food has not ever been shown to be more beneficial for anyone aside from the farmer who is able to charge more.

    My point remains that the cartoon Rtdhs posted, and most in this thread and including the silly strawman you use against that point, are dishonest oversimplifications of reality that are intended to scare and confuse than educate.


  • #38
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    King Mob wrote: »
    But organic farmers also use these things, only less efficient ones from arbitrarily defined "organic" sources.
    How do you know?

    I know several Organic growers including two that have been close friends of the family. They use free range horse sh*t instead of chemicals for fertilizer
    King Mob wrote: »
    If you want to seem to be making a reasonable post, don't use language that makes it seem like you don't know what you are talking.
    Just refering to "chemicals" as if that word was scary makes it seem like you don't understand basic science.
    That's exactly what they are.

    Mass GM food producers do not care two sh*ts what goes into their products as long as they fill the supermarket shelves.

    35ckefl.jpg

    This will be america in a few years time when they will ban you from growing your own crops. You are already banned from growing crops in your front garden in many states and also in public areas. This is because the Government knows that home grown and organic crops are good for you. The US Government now wants to label orrganic growers into the same classification as preppers.
    King Mob wrote: »
    This is not true. Organic foods have never been shown to be more healthy than non-organic food.


    Yet more dishonesty and/or ignorance.

    Non-organic foods do not cause any illness that is treated or prevented by vaccines.
    Eating organic food does not grant you the benefits of vaccines.

    The reason you believe all this is because you are read about this stuff in the main stream media newspapers.

    GM has been tested on live rats, and I would believe this, it will get worse as more and more GM products build up more immunities to pestilences etc..

    1432jyx.jpg
    King Mob wrote: »
    Vaccines do not contain mercury.

    Again you haven't a clue.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOqKLoYptF8


  • #39
    kristopher_1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭kristopher_1


    King Mob wrote: »
    But that's not been shown. Organic food has not ever been shown to be more beneficial for anyone aside from the farmer who is able to charge more.

    My point remains that the cartoon Rtdhs posted, and most in this thread, are dishonest oversimplifications of reality that are intended to scare and confuse than educate.

    If you have a vegetable grown organically, it tastes much better than those grown with petro based chemicals and that in itself is the benefit.

    You could argue tap water is safer than well water because it's chlorinated and of course much cheaper than digging your own well...but how does the tap water taste?

    I understand organic methods are more expensive but when oil and gas start to become more expensive, what will people do then?

    Phosphate is a finite resource just like fossil fuel and it's used for fertilizer.

    Worms are the earths natural composter, you think scientists can replace what earth has provided for millions of years? :)


  • #40
    Tzar Chasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,069 ✭✭✭Tzar Chasm


    king mob, if you think tneres a conspiracy by the organic food producers to dupe consumers into buying something which has no difference to the industrial farmed mass market product, please start a thread on it, i'd be interested in debating the subject in a serious manner, but only if you're willing to have a serious grown up discussion, no DiHydrogenMonoxide or other hilarious stuff like 'everything is chemicals


  • #41
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    If you have a vegetable grown organically, it tastes much better than those grown with petro based chemicals and that in itself is the benefit.

    You could argue tap water is safer than well water because it's chlorinated and of course much cheaper than digging your own well...but how does the tap water taste?
    And that is purely subjective, unless you have some experiments showing that organic foods are always identifiable by their supposedly superior taste.
    Cause I can point to others that show the opposite.
    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    I understand organic methods are more expensive but when oil and gas start to become more expensive, what will people do then?

    Phosphate is a finite resource just like fossil fuel and it's used for fertilizer.
    But that's not the point I was making, and it doesn't match with the point Rtdhs was making.
    His cartoon implies that non-organic pesticides are dangerous for the consumer purely because people wear masks when applying it.
    You continued this point by implying that I believed that drinking and eating raw pesticides and other materials is perfectly safe.

    Do you think these are fair and valid points to be making?
    kristopher_1 wrote: »
    Worms are the earths natural composter, you think scientists can replace what earth has provided for millions of years? :)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_tradition


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    kryogen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 25,953 ✭✭✭✭kryogen


    You can't hug your children with Nuclear Arms


  • #43
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    How do you know?

    I know several Organic growers including two that have been close friends of the family. They use free range horse sh*t instead of chemicals for fertilizer
    Because manure is not as efficient as some non-organic fertilisers, more is needed to produce a similar effect.

    And I assume, since you think your propaganda is fair, I take it you have no issues eating hore****?
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    That's exactly what they are.

    Mass GM food producers do not care two sh*ts what goes into their products as long as they fill the supermarket shelves.
    This has no relation to the point it quotes.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    This will be america in a few years time when they will ban you from growing your own crops. You are already banned from growing crops in your front garden in many states and also in public areas. This is because the Government knows that home grown and organic crops are good for you. The US Government now wants to label orrganic growers into the same classification as preppers.
    None of this is true and seems to be based entirely on what you read in the "alternative media" and propaganda.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    The reason you believe all this is because you are read about this stuff in the main stream media newspapers.
    No, it's because I understand basic science and don't believe everything I am told by cranks.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    GM has been tested on live rats, and I would believe this, it will get worse as more and more GM products build up more immunities to pestilences etc..
    I never mentioned GM anything. This is just an excuse to throw up more scary looking pictures instead of a rational argument.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Again you haven't a clue.
    I do have a clue cause again, I don't buy what I am told by pseudoscientists with agendas.
    No vaccines contain mercury.
    Some vaccines contain an organomercury compound.
    The compound is quite safe.

    Saying that it's just mercury and implying it's dangerous, is yet again, more dishonest oversimplification to scare people rather than educate them.


  • #44
    Tzar Chasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,069 ✭✭✭Tzar Chasm


    in fairness rtdh's cartoon was funny, you've just BuzzKilington'd the humor out of it


  • #45
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    king mob, if you think tneres a conspiracy by the organic food producers to dupe consumers into buying something which has no difference to the industrial farmed mass market product, please start a thread on it,
    I do not believe it's a conspiracy any more than any other product is over hyped or sold up to people. I do not believe they are engaging in deliberate cover-ups or outright falsification. Though some do take advantage of peoples ignorance of science and distrust of big business in their marketing.
    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    no DiHydrogenMonoxide or other hilarious stuff like 'everything is chemicals
    Again I only used it to highlight how rtdhs is using deceptive language. If you have an issue with me using that example, one wonders why you are not upset with the tactics others are using.


  • #46
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Woah, RTDH spouting the vaccines causing autism rubbish. The MMR controversy is well known and was debunked because of misconducted trials. This is common knowledge at this point.
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8695267.stm

    The man who's rambling about Autism not existing prior to the 1930s is frankly wrong. Many conditions weren't recognised at that point, diagnosing people with it doesn't mean that it didn't exist prior to the 1930s. There is evidence that people throughout history had autism, it just wasn't a recognised condition. For example, aspergers wasn't diagnosed when I was a child. This doesn't mean that it only came into existence when it got added to the DSM.

    Also a list of some figures that were likely to have some form of autism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_figures_sometimes_considered_autistic


  • #47
    Tzar Chasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,069 ✭✭✭Tzar Chasm


    yet you say
    organic farming has never been shown to be more beneficial to anyone other than the farmer growing it who can charge more money

    that seems to suggest you believe it to be a scam, and it might be reasonable to conclude that you believe the farmers may be active in some form of deception perpetrated on the consumer, ie the essence of a conspiracy.

    I take exception to the dhmo jibe as i view it as a weak attempt to belittle other posters in a side manner


  • #48
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    yet you say
    organic farming has never been shown to be more beneficial to anyone other than the farmer growing it who can charge more money

    that seems to suggest you believe it to be a scam, and it might be reasonable to conclude that you believe the farmers may be active in some form of deception perpetrated on the consumer, ie the essence of a conspiracy.
    There are plenty of companies and even industries out there that sell stuff that has no benefit.
    However most of these companies are not working together to secretly deceive people.

    I'm sure there are plenty of organic farmers who genuinely believe that organic farming is more beneficial or any number of other claims. But the fact is no study has ever show this and there is a few that show the opposite.
    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    I take exception to the dhmo jibe as i view it as a weak attempt to belittle other posters in a side manner
    I used it because it is exactly the same sort of language Rtdhs is using.
    Do you think that using "chemicals" as a scary word is a fair or reasonable thing to do?
    Do you think his cartoon is a fair representation of the facts?


  • #49
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    King Mob wrote: »
    Because manure is not as efficient as some non-organic fertilisers, more is needed to produce a similar effect.

    And I assume, since you think your propaganda is fair, I take it you have no issues eating hore****?
    Again you haven't a clue about crop production, you eat the crops grown with the fertilizer, in this case manure, you don't eat the fertilizer itself,
    You obviously grew up in the city. :p
    King Mob wrote: »

    None of this is true and seems to be based entirely on what you read in the "alternative media" and propaganda.
    I would prefer to take heed on the matter on alternative media than believe in corrupt government lies from MSM.

    ftms5h.jpg

    That thing about the rats is a classic example of a giant corporate like Monsanto paying off brown envelopes to Government and media representatives. At least some independent nations are taking heed to the warnings of GMO.
    King Mob wrote: »



    No, it's because I understand basic science and don't believe everything I am told by cranks.
    I never mentioned GM anything. This is just an excuse to throw up more scary looking pictures instead of a rational argument.
    If you want a rational argument why are you discussing it in this thread? :rolleyes:

    Can you not even read the title. :rolleyes:

    YOUR FAVOURITE POLITICAL CARTOONS CT SATIRE AND PROPAGANDA ARTWORK. :rolleyes:
    King Mob wrote: »
    I do have a clue cause again, I don't buy what I am told by pseudoscientists with agendas.
    No vaccines contain mercury.
    Some vaccines contain an organomercury compound.
    The compound is quite safe.
    Mercury has and is being used as a preservative in vaccines.

    Only in today's news. :)
    AAP opposes U.N. mercury ban

    King Mob wrote: »
    Saying that it's just mercury and implying it's dangerous, is yet again, more dishonest oversimplification to scare people rather than educate them.

    Mike Adams would know a lot more than you about mercury and other toxic chemicals that are used by big pharma to develop harmful vaccinations.

    Vaccinated children have up to 500% more disease than unvaccinated children

    I think at this stage you should give up reading the labels on your kellogs corn flakes packets about how good they are for you. "The Best for you each Morning"

    24wapn9.jpg


  • #50
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Again you haven't a clue about crop production, you eat the crops grown with the fertilizer, in this case manure, you don't eat the fertilizer itself,
    You obviously grew up in the city. :p
    So then your cartoon is indeed ignorant or dishonest?
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    I would prefer to take heed on the matter on alternative media than believe in corrupt government lies from MSM.
    Because as we all know, the alternative media can't possibly be corrupt or have an agenda or lack professional standard :rolleyes:
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    That thing about the rats is a classic example of a giant corporate like Monsanto paying off brown envelopes to Government and media representatives. [URL="http://www.ienearth.org/docs/what-countries-
    If you want a rational argument why are you discussing it in this thread? :rolleyes:
    Again I never once mentioned GM food and they have nothing to do with my point.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Can you not even read the title. :rolleyes:

    YOUR FAVOURITE POLITICAL CARTOONS CT SATIRE AND PROPAGANDA ARTWORK. :rolleyes:
    And I am pointing out that your cartoons, satire and propaganda is awful, horrible and dishonest.
    You seem to have no issue with that.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Mercury has and is being used as a preservative in vaccines.

    Only in today's news. :)
    AAP opposes U.N. mercury ban
    Again: Organamercury is used in some vaccines.
    From the article you posted:
    “Despite claims of anti-vaccine proponents who have erroneously linked thimerosal to autism, studies during the past 15 years have not shown any evidence of harm,” the AAP wrote. “Some of those activists confused ethylmercury with the dangerous neurotoxin methylmercury.”

    This is because ethylmercury is not the same as pure mercury.
    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    Mike Adams would know a lot more than you about mercury and other toxic chemicals that are used by big pharma to develop harmful vaccinations.
    No he wouldn't.
    He would know a lot about writing the same sort of propaganda you lap up and making money off the fear of real medicine...
    But he couldn't possibly be corrupt :rolleyes:


  • #51
    Tzar Chasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,069 ✭✭✭Tzar Chasm


    what's to say the cartoon specifically references fertilisers the napsak is marked with the international symbol for poison, now I don't know about you, but i'd presume its referencing petrochemical herbicides/pesticides


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    what's to say the cartoon specifically references fertilisers the napsak is marked with the international symbol for poison, now I don't know about you, but i'd presume its referencing petrochemical herbicides/pesticides

    And do you think there's an important difference between eating a part of the vegetable which doesn't get the majority of the pesticide, which is then washed off anyway and working all day at spraying the pesticide as an aerosol?

    Do you think that it is fair to leave that difference out?

    And what about his repeated references to "chemicals" and mercury and genetically modified food. Do you think that he is using these terms in a fair and rational way?
    If you think it is, how is it any different to the parody of what he is doing that is DHMO?


  • #53
    Tzar Chasm
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,069 ✭✭✭Tzar Chasm


    your notion that it just washes off is an interesting one, also what about vegetables such as broccoli where the sprayed part is the part you eat?


  • #54
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Tzar Chasm wrote: »
    your notion that it just washes off is an interesting one, also what about vegetables such as broccoli where the sprayed part is the part you eat?
    Again, yes, washing it off in the course of preparation is a very standard thing to do.

    But you've failed to address my points entirely, please address them.


  • #55
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    This would be quite relevant to recent events.

    Could you imagine if an actor got shot by mistake. :eek:

    27ziw6x.jpg


  • #56
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    The real reason behind Sandy Hook. :p

    2sa05uc.jpg

    Something concerning Main Stream Media that is not from David Dee for a change. :D

    34ezxbp.jpg


  • #57
    Run_to_da_hills
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    This picture would tie in well with the hypocrisy of the US Government on its attitude towards arms..

    We have the recent demonizing of personal weapons contrasting the recent massive increase of weapons among various US state departments.

    34ipqon.jpg


  • #58
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Run_to_da_hills wrote: »
    This picture would tie in well with the hypocrisy of the US Government on its attitude towards arms..

    We have the recent demonizing of personal weapons contrasting the recent massive increase of weapons among various US state departments.

    Lol, you mean the claims of a massive increase that's been shown to you again and again and again is not actually true...?

    Again, why bother with truth and accuracy when you have crappy, dishonest schlock?


  • #59
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,758 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    Lol, you mean the claims of a massive increase that's been shown to you again and again and again is not actually true...?

    Again, why bother with truth and accuracy when you have crappy, dishonest schlock?


    You do realize this thread is about political cartoons CT satire and propaganda artwork ?? ... :o


  • #60
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    weisses wrote: »
    You do realize this thread is about political cartoons CT satire and propaganda artwork ?? ... :o

    I'm just voicing my opinion that they are dishonest, distasteful and often vile.


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    weisses
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,758 ✭✭✭weisses


    King Mob wrote: »
    I'm just voicing my opinion that they are dishonest, distasteful and often vile.

    So why Looking for truth and accuracy in an satire and propaganda artwork thread ?? ....


Advertisement