方舟子的新语丝: 袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步 - 未名空间MITBBS历史存档

国际科技财经博客移民网络热点娱乐民生时事公众号

Redian新闻

>未名空间

>WaterWorld - 未名水世界

方舟子的新语丝: 袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步

方舟子的新语丝: 袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步# WaterWorld - 未名水世界

D*a2012-03-15 07:03

1 楼

袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步
http://www.xys.org/xys/ebooks/others/science/dajia12/zhuanjiyin
作者：风魔
前些天，在新语丝上看到了《南方日报》对袁隆平院士的采访，经过与张教
授的探讨，得出了一个结论：袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步！
可当我把结论发表在一个科普网站的论坛上时，一石激起千层浪，招致骂声
无数。这让我顿时想起了当年人气极高的青年导师唐骏，和方舟子的那句“我要
打掉这个虚假的偶像”。
在来看看采访的原文之前我要说，这里面应该不存在记者的断章取义或误读，
又或是语境问题，因为袁隆平在别的不同媒体上接受采访时，表露的也是这个意
思。只不过这一次，他的深层用意已经很明显了：
“我们的超级稻绝对不含转基因。目前转基因有抗虫抗病的，来自细
菌，叫做“毒蛋白基因”，人吃了会怎么样？又不能由人试吃，只能用小白鼠来
做实验，但人是人，小白鼠是小白鼠。大家对“抗病抗虫的转基因农作物能不能
吃”存有疑问，完全可以理解，国家也很慎重。单从过去的实验来看，是没有问
题的。
我愿意为科学献身，吃吃那个转基因大米，证明没有问题。
我也号召年轻人试吃，证明对下一代也没有影响。
但是，转基因也不能一概而论，不全是抗病虫害的。有的转基因只是为提高
产量的。比如我们正在研究的、把玉米这种高光效植物的碳4基因，转到属于碳3
植物的水稻上来，提高光和作用效率。按光合作用进行途径的不同，碳4比碳3光
合效率高30%—35%。玉米本来可以吃，这种转基因就不会存在什么问题。”
以上就是采访中针对转基因问题的全文。
说到转基因，作为一个外行人，我首先考虑到的就是食品安全问题，至于环
境问题或经济问题，距离我都太遥远了，不作考虑。而对安全问题，我会想到两
点：第一是你要转入的这个基因，它安不安全；第二是即便你这个基因安全，在
转入之后是否依然安全——毕竟生命形式是复杂多变的嘛。
那么针对这两个问题，作为农业专家的袁隆平更看重哪一个呢？无疑，从他
最后的一段话中可以看出，在介绍自己的转基因产品的时候，他更看重第一个问
题，而对第二个问题避而不谈。接下来我们再看看前面，他针对别人的转基因产
品，是否也一视同仁呢？——不！他没有这样！请看：
“目前转基因有抗虫抗病的，来自细菌，叫做“毒蛋白基因”，人吃了会怎
么样？又不能由人试吃，只能用小白鼠来做实验”。
这个由苏云金杆菌制造的Ｂｔ毒蛋白难道只是停留在“小白鼠”阶段么？不！
早在１９３８年，法国就开始使用。而在美国的市面上80%的玉米都是转基因产
品，而其中绝大部分都是转BT基因的玉米。美国人已经吃了十几年！
袁隆平为什么要用小白鼠来吓唬人呢？有人说了，袁老这里所说的，是转BT
水稻，不是美国人吃的转BT玉米。
那也就是说袁隆平不是要强调BT基因有害与否，而是想强调转BT水稻和转BT
玉米是不一样的，BT基因进入水稻之后的安全性——这才是袁隆平想强调的。
这下就清楚了吧，他在针对别人的转基因产品的时候强调的是第二个问题，
而误导第一个问题——在这里他的逻辑反了过来！
他为什么要这样做？为什么对待别人的产品和对待自己的产品采用双重标准？
用歪曲和隐瞒的方式指责别人的同时，为自己的产品做广告，好高明的营销
方式——袁隆平简直就是个成功的商人了。
但同时，袁隆平你知不知道，你还伤害了中国农业科学技术的进步！

w*l2012-03-15 07:03

2 楼

张教授是哪个？

【在 D*******a 的大作中提到】

: 袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步
: http://www.xys.org/xys/ebooks/others/science/dajia12/zhuanjiyin
: 作者：风魔
: 前些天，在新语丝上看到了《南方日报》对袁隆平院士的采访，经过与张教
: 授的探讨，得出了一个结论：袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步！
: 可当我把结论发表在一个科普网站的论坛上时，一石激起千层浪，招致骂声
: 无数。这让我顿时想起了当年人气极高的青年导师唐骏，和方舟子的那句“我要
: 打掉这个虚假的偶像”。
: 在来看看采访的原文之前我要说，这里面应该不存在记者的断章取义或误读，
: 又或是语境问题，因为袁隆平在别的不同媒体上接受采访时，表露的也是这个意

p*d2012-03-15 07:03

3 楼

方舟子的邏輯／修辭學令人驚艷啊。
“有人说了，袁老这里所说的，是转BT水稻，不是美国人吃的转BT玉米。”
於是反駁了“有人”就等於駁斥袁隆平了？

t*62012-03-15 07:03

4 楼

yuan longping is a shit

U*S2012-03-15 07:03

5 楼

教主收到新指令了？还是为了转移对菊花抄袭和基金问题的视线？

n*m2012-03-15 07:03

6 楼

拍照留念。
解决了中国几亿人民吃饭问题的袁隆平，在你们嘴里成了 shit？？？
能不能再无耻一点儿？？？

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: yuan longping is a shit

n*m2012-03-15 07:03

7 楼

对中国做出杰出贡献的科学家，袁隆平、钱学森，都受到过教主的贬损。

【在 D*******a 的大作中提到】

h*u2012-03-15 07:03

8 楼

还能更不要脸一点吗？

【在 D*******a 的大作中提到】

w*l2012-03-15 07:03

9 楼

Yes, they can.
发信人: tomcat76 (BBSID), 信区: WaterWorld
标题: Re: 方舟子的新语丝: 袁隆平正在阻碍中国农业科学技术的进步
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Mar 15 14:08:37 2012, 美东)
yuan longping is a shit

【在 h******u 的大作中提到】

: 还能更不要脸一点吗？

x*u2012-03-15 07:03

10 楼

It's your logic, or lack thereof, that's surprising.
If Yuan wasn't talking about just BT rice, then he must be referring to all
BT crops. In that case, corn with BT genes have been on the market for many
years, and human consumption of it hasn't shown any adverse effect. Which
means, Yuan's objection of crops with BT genes is even less objective.
Putting that "someone would say" there is helping Yuan's case. Guess
someone had to point out that to you since your reading and comprehension
skill is not up to standard.

【在 p**********d 的大作中提到】

: 方舟子的邏輯／修辭學令人驚艷啊。
: “有人说了，袁老这里所说的，是转BT水稻，不是美国人吃的转BT玉米。”
: 於是反駁了“有人”就等於駁斥袁隆平了？

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

11 楼

how do you define adverse effect on those who are wellknown for consuming
junk food? to them there's never any adverse effect. life is short. death is
nothing.
yuan said:
单从过去的实验来看，是没有问题的。
我愿意为科学献身，吃吃那个转基因大米，证明没有问题。
我也号召年轻人试吃，证明对下一代也没有影响。
但是，转基因也不能一概而论，不全是抗病虫害的。有的转基因只是为提高产量的。
1st and 4th are more than objective. with 2nd and 3rd, any attack on him is
immoral and fkinsane.

all
many
Which

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

:
: It's your logic, or lack thereof, that's surprising.
: If Yuan wasn't talking about just BT rice, then he must be referring to all
: BT crops. In that case, corn with BT genes have been on the market for many
: years, and human consumption of it hasn't shown any adverse effect. Which
: means, Yuan's objection of crops with BT genes is even less objective.
: Putting that "someone would say" there is helping Yuan's case. Guess
: someone had to point out that to you since your reading and comprehension
: skill is not up to standard.

t*62012-03-15 07:03

12 楼

He is really an idiot about GM food,he just proved himself a dude by his his
stupid comment.
We praised him for his work before, he also deserve "a shit" now.

【在 n*****m 的大作中提到】

: 拍照留念。
: 解决了中国几亿人民吃饭问题的袁隆平，在你们嘴里成了 shit？？？
: 能不能再无耻一点儿？？？

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

13 楼

he's not. ur. progressive doesn't lend to aggressive. this is very clear
from his comments and he's willing to make the sacrifice himself. again with
that, any attack on him is immoral and fkinsane.

his

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: He is really an idiot about GM food,he just proved himself a dude by his his
: stupid comment.
: We praised him for his work before, he also deserve "a shit" now.

B*G2012-03-15 07:03

14 楼

这不是方舟子自己写的吧，只是他认同这个帖子而已。

【在 p**********d 的大作中提到】

t*62012-03-15 07:03

15 楼

This fucking old man just wants his own profit.
If people buy GM rice, his work will be nothing and his company will make
less money.
Actually he is developing his own GM rice now, he will absolutely say GM
rice is good when his product is ready.
So many idiots can not see the conflict of interest here.

is
is

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: how do you define adverse effect on those who are wellknown for consuming
: junk food? to them there's never any adverse effect. life is short. death is
: nothing.
: yuan said:
: 单从过去的实验来看，是没有问题的。
: 我愿意为科学献身，吃吃那个转基因大米，证明没有问题。
: 我也号召年轻人试吃，证明对下一代也没有影响。
: 但是，转基因也不能一概而论，不全是抗病虫害的。有的转基因只是为提高产量的。
: 1st and 4th are more than objective. with 2nd and 3rd, any attack on him is
: immoral and fkinsane.

t*62012-03-15 07:03

16 楼

He is not a saint, man.
Other people have already proved that BT protein is safe.
This selfish old man is really a shit in this case

with

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: he's not. ur. progressive doesn't lend to aggressive. this is very clear
: from his comments and he's willing to make the sacrifice himself. again with
: that, any attack on him is immoral and fkinsane.
:
: his

d*g2012-03-15 07:03

17 楼

唉，写得乱七八糟。
作者的理解能力很低啊，如果文中真的是袁的原话，他明显说的是C4到C3.
跟引入Bt明显的不同啊

w*l2012-03-15 07:03

18 楼

嗯，此帖显示了楼上的良好教养。

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: This fucking old man just wants his own profit.
: If people buy GM rice, his work will be nothing and his company will make
: less money.
: Actually he is developing his own GM rice now, he will absolutely say GM
: rice is good when his product is ready.
: So many idiots can not see the conflict of interest here.
:
: is
: is

x*u2012-03-15 07:03

19 楼

is
is
He was talking about BT crops was only tested on on lab rats. Human test
should be tested on volunteers to determine it's safety. When in fact, BT
crops have been on the market and widely consumed already. So, there have
been many "volunteer testers" of BT crops for more than a decade. Is it
enough to determine it's safety? If not, what's his standard?
Without talking about all of that, he then go on to advertise his own
product that does not have BT genes, which he claim is safer to consume
because of it. This is a very typical scare tactic in product advertisement
. Conflict of interest makes his statement very suspect in term of
credibility.

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

t*62012-03-15 07:03

20 楼

He was just trying to protect his work and company
BT has been used in growing organic food for about 20 years, this old shit
just pretended he did not know that.

advertisement

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

:
: is
: is
: He was talking about BT crops was only tested on on lab rats. Human test
: should be tested on volunteers to determine it's safety. When in fact, BT
: crops have been on the market and widely consumed already. So, there have
: been many "volunteer testers" of BT crops for more than a decade. Is it
: enough to determine it's safety? If not, what's his standard?
: Without talking about all of that, he then go on to advertise his own
: product that does not have BT genes, which he claim is safer to consume

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

21 楼

ur questioning the character before debating the fact. if "developing" means
research, why not? commercialization is way premature.

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

n*y2012-03-15 07:03

22 楼

这是方舟子写的么？他是做科学研究的么？怎么写文这么大字报体？

转基因食物的一个问题是有些蛋白质被降解以后有可能引起免疫系统的强烈反应，所以
一般转啥基因转好了一般是试吃过了才敢大规模推广的。

s*e2012-03-15 07:03

23 楼

中药被中国人使用了几千年了，按照严格的现代医药原理，仍然不能认为是安全的，因
为没有严格的统计，毒理，安全测试，等等。
同样，转基因大米或者作物即使已经被使用了20年，也不能就说是安全的。
你这样说袁，就是一个垃圾。

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: He was just trying to protect his work and company
: BT has been used in growing organic food for about 20 years, this old shit
: just pretended he did not know that.
:
: advertisement

a*s2012-03-15 07:03

24 楼

老袁一把年纪，该有的荣誉都有了，吃香的喝辣的，干嘛趟这浑水。

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

25 楼

maybe he aitnt a saint, but bt is still debatable. his willingness to try
himself shows enough character.

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: He is not a saint, man.
: Other people have already proved that BT protein is safe.
: This selfish old man is really a shit in this case
:
: with

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

26 楼

“BT crops have been on the market and widely consumed already.
So, there have been many "volunteer testers" of BT crops for
more than a decade. ” -
holy moly, ur funny. here’s ur logic. u’ve been raped for long ->
so u volunteered -> raping u is legitimate. get the fact straight
plz. us consumers PROTESTED.
http://www.enewspf.com/news/88888996-bpgulf-oil-spill/31713-pre
on-walmart-to-rebuff-ge-sweet-corn-intensifies.html
http://www.deathrattlesports.com/archives/7515/gmo-labeling-pet
nearing-one-million-movement-grows-despite-monsanto-cronyism/
it’s possible that some comfort women enjoyed, but ur volunteer
doesnt represent any1 else.

test
fact, BT
have
it
consume
advertisement

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

27 楼

bt in organic farming is the same as bt in gmo? here’s sth for ur education.
http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/1058-bt-in-o

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: He was just trying to protect his work and company
: BT has been used in growing organic food for about 20 years, this old shit
: just pretended he did not know that.
:
: advertisement

s*e2012-03-15 07:03

28 楼

我觉得转基因作物，即使在国外已经用了很多年，即使已经被证明是安全的----现在肯
定还没有----在国内也需要重新做安全试验。
原因很简单，国外的药物进入国内都需要重新做临床，因为需要根据中国人的体质建立
新的标准，比如剂量等等。牛奶老外喝了这么多年，安全不？还不是很大比例的中国人
根本不能喝？

t*62012-03-15 07:03

29 楼

Why you can always find some misleading website? and never find a useful
website.
It is a miracle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
about"The gene of one, or several of the active, trimmed toxin is
transferred to the GM plant and will be synthesized in every single cell of
the transgenic plant and the active toxin is being expressed by every cell,
all the time. Therefore, the ACTIVE TOXIN IS IN EVERY PLANT CELL AND TISSUE,
ALL THE TIME and cannot be washed off."
!!!!do you know tissue specific expression promoter???????????????????
Do you know your brain cells do not express proteins specific in your liver
cells or your sperm so that your brain cells are not liver cell, muscle
cells or any else cells. Why??????????????
we can let BT expressed only in the plant cells that we do not eat.
how? read the paper, please.
remember, your brain cells are not your sperm

education.

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: bt in organic farming is the same as bt in gmo? here’s sth for ur education.
: http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/1058-bt-in-o

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

30 楼

ur argument was some1’s sperms are ur sperms. the article aint misleading
at all, by addressing external vs internal. If u believe u can control ur
sperms without affecting ur brain cells, that’s a different argument and ur
example of bt in organic farming is to mislead, to say the least. now u
believe ur brain cells support ur brain to function, but the scientific
evidence comes from monsanto which manufactured ur artificial sperms and
made the injection. it’s ur decision to take the artificial sperms, but
label it clearly because I dont wanna touch it and im not sure whether the
sperms will affect other parts of ur body including ur brain. from my
observation and other scientific studies, they do.

of
,
TISSUE,
liver

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: Why you can always find some misleading website? and never find a useful
: website.
: It is a miracle!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
: about"The gene of one, or several of the active, trimmed toxin is
: transferred to the GM plant and will be synthesized in every single cell of
: the transgenic plant and the active toxin is being expressed by every cell,
: all the time. Therefore, the ACTIVE TOXIN IS IN EVERY PLANT CELL AND TISSUE,
: ALL THE TIME and cannot be washed off."
: !!!!do you know tissue specific expression promoter???????????????????
: Do you know your brain cells do not express proteins specific in your liver

t*62012-03-15 07:03

31 楼

BT protein is only expressed in plant cells we do not eat for GM rice case,
That's the point, man
you really know nothing about tissue organ-specific expression so you can
not understand what I am saying
GM food is a very hard issue for most people.

ur

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: ur argument was some1’s sperms are ur sperms. the article aint misleading
: at all, by addressing external vs internal. If u believe u can control ur
: sperms without affecting ur brain cells, that’s a different argument and ur
: example of bt in organic farming is to mislead, to say the least. now u
: believe ur brain cells support ur brain to function, but the scientific
: evidence comes from monsanto which manufactured ur artificial sperms and
: made the injection. it’s ur decision to take the artificial sperms, but
: label it clearly because I dont wanna touch it and im not sure whether the
: sperms will affect other parts of ur body including ur brain. from my
: observation and other scientific studies, they do.

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

32 楼

i agree it's a subject beyond most ppl, but it doesnt mean questions from
them aint legitimate. the questions is whether the expression is limited to
that organ 100%, not just the batch you modified, but in future mutation as
well. how advanced are we in genomics when answering this question?

,

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: BT protein is only expressed in plant cells we do not eat for GM rice case,
: That's the point, man
: you really know nothing about tissue organ-specific expression so you can
: not understand what I am saying
: GM food is a very hard issue for most people.
:
: ur

t*62012-03-15 07:03

33 楼

poor man
nothing is 100% in our world, water can also kill a man, why do you require
100% only for GM food.

i agree it's a subject beyond most ppl, but it doesnt mean questions from
them aint legitimate. the questions is whether the expression is limited to
that organ 100%, not just the batch you modified, but in future mutation as
well. how advanced are we in genomics when answering this question?

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: i agree it's a subject beyond most ppl, but it doesnt mean questions from
: them aint legitimate. the questions is whether the expression is limited to
: that organ 100%, not just the batch you modified, but in future mutation as
: well. how advanced are we in genomics when answering this question?
:
: ,

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

34 楼

water is sth we cant avoid. drug is the same, in spite of negative impact.
gmo aint. think with ur brain.
if not 100%, how much r we talking about?

require
to
as

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: poor man
: nothing is 100% in our world, water can also kill a man, why do you require
: 100% only for GM food.
:
: i agree it's a subject beyond most ppl, but it doesnt mean questions from
: them aint legitimate. the questions is whether the expression is limited to
: that organ 100%, not just the batch you modified, but in future mutation as
: well. how advanced are we in genomics when answering this question?

t*62012-03-15 07:03

35 楼

seafood, rice, peanut, milk etc also kill people
if not 100%, how much r we talking about? i do not know, i do not
understand why you only need 100% for GM food?

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: water is sth we cant avoid. drug is the same, in spite of negative impact.
: gmo aint. think with ur brain.
: if not 100%, how much r we talking about?
:
: require
: to
: as

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

36 楼

seafood, rice, peanut, milk - there were reasons for ppl to consume and they
're the product of natural selection. let me repeat, gmo aint sth we have to
produce and they're artificial.
u said "organ-specific", 100% means i asked a simple question - r u sure?
now u asked me why u hv to be sure. can u go find ur brain first before
answering?

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: seafood, rice, peanut, milk etc also kill people
: if not 100%, how much r we talking about? i do not know, i do not
: understand why you only need 100% for GM food?

x*u2012-03-15 07:03

37 楼

That's freaking irrelevant for the question of whether those crops have been
tested or not. Whether the subjects were willingly or unwillingly engaged
in the testing is not the question here. It's whether these subjects did
indeed have an adverse reaction to the crops. If not, then how much longer
do such tests need to run for us to say the crop is safe.
Trying to scare people about danger of a product yet does not offer any kind
of standard for what's considered "Safe" is the typical response of someone
believing in pseudo science.

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: “BT crops have been on the market and widely consumed already.
: So, there have been many "volunteer testers" of BT crops for
: more than a decade. ” -
: holy moly, ur funny. here’s ur logic. u’ve been raped for long ->
: so u volunteered -> raping u is legitimate. get the fact straight
: plz. us consumers PROTESTED.
: http://www.enewspf.com/news/88888996-bpgulf-oil-spill/31713-pre
: on-walmart-to-rebuff-ge-sweet-corn-intensifies.html
: http://www.deathrattlesports.com/archives/7515/gmo-labeling-pet
: nearing-one-million-movement-grows-despite-monsanto-cronyism/

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

38 楼

again how do u define "adverse reaction"? r they subject to sample test, e.g
. organ damage, infertility? does mere survival mean no "adverse reaction"?

been
engaged
longer
kind
someone

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

:
: That's freaking irrelevant for the question of whether those crops have been
: tested or not. Whether the subjects were willingly or unwillingly engaged
: in the testing is not the question here. It's whether these subjects did
: indeed have an adverse reaction to the crops. If not, then how much longer
: do such tests need to run for us to say the crop is safe.
: Trying to scare people about danger of a product yet does not offer any kind
: of standard for what's considered "Safe" is the typical response of someone
: believing in pseudo science.

x*u2012-03-15 07:03

39 楼

.g
If you can't even tell me what you consider "adverse reaction" is, then how
the heck can you say the crop isn't safe or not?

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: again how do u define "adverse reaction"? r they subject to sample test, e.g
: . organ damage, infertility? does mere survival mean no "adverse reaction"?
:
: been
: engaged
: longer
: kind
: someone

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

40 楼

holy smoke, do u read? u said "adverse reaction". i asked u to define.
nonetheless, i gave u examples - organ damage, infertility, better than u.

how
.g
?

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

:
: .g
: If you can't even tell me what you consider "adverse reaction" is, then how
: the heck can you say the crop isn't safe or not?

x*u2012-03-15 07:03

41 楼

Go get some logic lessons, will you? You are the one saying the crops aren'
t safe. Then you should define what effect they have on human that you
think is the reason they should be considered unsafe.
You can't just say some people have infertility, then that must be caused by
the GMF.

【在 t**n 的大作中提到】

: holy smoke, do u read? u said "adverse reaction". i asked u to define.
: nonetheless, i gave u examples - organ damage, infertility, better than u.
:
: how
: .g
: ?

t*62012-03-15 07:03

42 楼

老袁也是老糊涂了。
自己是搞育种的，不懂转基因就别出来胡说，结果一出来就是一句“虫子都不吃，人能
吃”？。一下子就把自己的愚昧show了出来。貌似一辈子没有用过蚊香。
本来好好的是一个典型，非要不懂胡说八道乱误导人，又不是缺钱到要死。

D*a2012-03-15 07:03

43 楼

老袁就10多年搞转基因了，不过转的是赖氨酸，维生素A这种营养型基因，都是转基因
，和你们孟山都转的杀虫剂除草剂有本质的区别，
你狗屁不懂就别瞎胡扯好不好，为了几毛钱不怕人笑话

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: 老袁也是老糊涂了。
: 自己是搞育种的，不懂转基因就别出来胡说，结果一出来就是一句“虫子都不吃，人能
: 吃”？。一下子就把自己的愚昧show了出来。貌似一辈子没有用过蚊香。
: 本来好好的是一个典型，非要不懂胡说八道乱误导人，又不是缺钱到要死。

t*62012-03-15 07:03

44 楼

水稻里面转赖氨酸，VitA 基因？你知道自己在说什么吗？
转基因水稻是国内的专利，不是蒙山都。BT的专利早过期限了
什么都不懂就造谣
可怜好好的老袁这么老了名节不保，不过为了自己的公司袁隆高科倒也是有利可图
人为财死啊

【在 D*******a 的大作中提到】

: 老袁就10多年搞转基因了，不过转的是赖氨酸，维生素A这种营养型基因，都是转基因
: ，和你们孟山都转的杀虫剂除草剂有本质的区别，
: 你狗屁不懂就别瞎胡扯好不好，为了几毛钱不怕人笑话

D*a2012-03-15 07:03

45 楼

继续打脸
高赖氨酸来自于一种豆类的基因
http://www.sjzls.heagri.gov.cn/default3.aspx?id=2875
浙江大学成功培育高赖氨酸杂交稻
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
2005年7月28日点击：148次来源:新华社
浙江大学农业与生物技术学院凃巨民教授、香港中文大学生物系辛世文院士和中国
杂交水稻研究发展中心袁隆平院士合作，日前成功地培育出高赖氨酸超级杂交稻。据介
绍，这种超级杂交稻赖氨酸含量增高是由于其亲本被导入了一种来源于南亚洲优质食用
翼豆的储藏蛋白基因，因而营养天然。目前，高赖氨酸超级杂交稻现已进入大田试种阶
段。
你脸肿了吗，还继续吗？

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: 水稻里面转赖氨酸，VitA 基因？你知道自己在说什么吗？
: 转基因水稻是国内的专利，不是蒙山都。BT的专利早过期限了
: 什么都不懂就造谣
: 可怜好好的老袁这么老了名节不保，不过为了自己的公司袁隆高科倒也是有利可图
: 人为财死啊

t*62012-03-15 07:03

46 楼

转的不是赖氨酸基因，合成赖氨酸的关键酶的基因。你光看见新闻确读不懂。
不过你刚好证明袁隆平转基因的安全性的认可和袁隆平在经济利益上对其他转基因水稻
的不利评价的来源。
老袁的内裤就这样被你脱了，哈哈。你只是内奸级的国宝，我都不知道袁隆平自己偷偷
搞转基因，哈哈。

【在 D*******a 的大作中提到】

: 继续打脸
: 高赖氨酸来自于一种豆类的基因
: http://www.sjzls.heagri.gov.cn/default3.aspx?id=2875
: 浙江大学成功培育高赖氨酸杂交稻
: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: ----
: 2005年7月28日点击：148次来源:新华社
: 浙江大学农业与生物技术学院凃巨民教授、香港中文大学生物系辛世文院士和中国
: 杂交水稻研究发展中心袁隆平院士合作，日前成功地培育出高赖氨酸超级杂交稻。据介
: 绍，这种超级杂交稻赖氨酸含量增高是由于其亲本被导入了一种来源于南亚洲优质食用

t*n2012-03-15 07:03

47 楼

idiotic. is this the best reply you can come up with after two days of
meditation? are these posts from a kindergartener who speaks in disconnected
language and logic?
u: said "adverse reaction", whatever the heck that means.
m: didn't say anything about "safe". I said unknown - technology not
advanced enough to know.
do u read? do u hv a mother tongue?

aren'
by

【在 x****u 的大作中提到】

:
: Go get some logic lessons, will you? You are the one saying the crops aren'
: t safe. Then you should define what effect they have on human that you
: think is the reason they should be considered unsafe.
: You can't just say some people have infertility, then that must be caused by
: the GMF.

s*y2012-03-15 07:03

48 楼

一般人达到你这样无耻的境地，还是比较难的。
到底是物以类聚，难怪你维护fzz。

【在 t******6 的大作中提到】

: yuan longping is a shit