Mountain Project Logo

PBR sold to the Russians! & bull$ !t GMO disscussion..

Tom Sherman · · Austin, TX · Joined Feb 2013 · Points: 433
Eric G. wrote:Why would you stop drinking a beer that you like because it is owned by a foreign corporation?
you're missing the point Eric! it's not free-range or wild-caught anymore, the communist's are bottling it now
J. Serpico · · Saratoga County, NY · Joined Dec 2009 · Points: 140
England wrote: Not all of us have the funds to be beer snobs.
If that is what I could afford, I wouldn't drink beer.

I hated shitty beer in college, so I'd by a cheap 5th of Vodka. Worked a lot faster if the goal was to get shitfaced and make an ass out of yourself. Tasted better too, especially after a few ounces were gone. PBR always taste like shit.

When I grew up, I realized beer actually could taste good and be interesting.
J. Albers · · Colorado · Joined Jul 2008 · Points: 1,926
Morgan Patterson wrote: They'd like you to think that... tampering with genetic sequences and splicing flounder genes into tomatoes is significantly different then selective breeding of traits.
Nope, not really. At a basic chemical level, genes are genes. There isn't anything special about an animal versus plant gene. But hey thanks for posting what beers have wasted their time and effort to be GMO free...now I know who doesn't understand science but does respond to popular hysteria.
Ashort · · Las Vegas, NV · Joined Apr 2014 · Points: 56
J. Serpico wrote: If that is what I could afford, I wouldn't drink beer. I hated shitty beer in college, so I'd by a cheap 5th of Vodka. Worked a lot faster if the goal was to get shitfaced and make an ass out of yourself. Tasted better too, especially after a few ounces were gone. PBR always taste like shit. When I grew up, I realized beer actually could taste good and be interesting.
Trust me, it's much better to spend a lot of money on a lot of shitty beer that doesn't even get you drunk. At least it gives you street cred, or cliff cred in this case.
Eric Mountford · · Lakewood, CO · Joined Oct 2011 · Points: 0

Well actually I think I'll recant my earlier knee jerk opinion. Don't get me wrong, I still think PBR is shitty beer, because well....it is. But I don't have to drink it either. What I am for is jobs for Americans. Just too many companies being sold to foreign investors, the trade deficit, devaluation of the dollar, high foreign debt, ect. Just plain bad for American businesses. Don't get me wrong I understand a world economy, but no matter how you look at it jobs at several levels and company profits go overseas. And that's a deficit and bad for the US. This is a great country that I love and I want to see it, and it's people, do well economically.

Jim T · · Colorado · Joined Jun 2012 · Points: 469

With recent regulator approval of the Groupo Modelo deal, I think the current stat is that over 75% of all beer sold in the U.S is produced by companies from other countries. One problem with this is that the corporate profits as well as salaries of the high paying jobs such as owners, directors, accountants, attorneys etc are taxed elsewhere. And the salaries themselves are spent elsewhere and pumped into other economies. Buy micros.

On the other hand, the sheer size and might of these companies is swaying politics in states like Colorado, allowing ever looser liquor laws (easing of the blue laws). Even CU sells beer again at Foldom field, so it's not all bad. ;)

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE85S0B420120629?irpc=932i

John Byrnes · · Fort Collins, CO · Joined Dec 2007 · Points: 392
Scottmx426 wrote:People argue about everything on here.
No they don't!
Brendan Blanchard · · Boulder, CO · Joined Oct 2010 · Points: 590

My willingness to drink PBR is directly related to how much alcohol I've already consumed.

For those who do like it, follow the sausage principle. "If you like it, DON'T ask how it's made."

M Mobley · · Bar Harbor, ME · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 911

Russians are OK by me. Maybe they can come up with a high alcohol dark PBR.

Morgan Patterson · · NH · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 8,945
J. Albers wrote: Nope, not really. At a basic chemical level, genes are genes. There isn't anything special about an animal versus plant gene. But hey thanks for posting what beers have wasted their time and effort to be GMO free...now I know who doesn't understand science but does respond to popular hysteria.
As soon as you get those flounders to mate with those tomatoes and produce viable offspring I'll give you some credit until then, as a scientific person, I'll keep with my well thought out ethical position that they are different processes with dramatically different results and thus are not the same.
England · · Colorado Springs · Joined Aug 2008 · Points: 270

How did a PSA on a climbing staple turn into some bull$#!t pissing match over GMO's. Also, Patterson's "Other healthy beer choices" is MP gold.

J. Albers · · Colorado · Joined Jul 2008 · Points: 1,926
Morgan Patterson wrote: As soon as you get those flounders to mate with those tomatoes and produce viable offspring I'll give you some credit until then, as a scientific person, I'll keep with my well thought out ethical position that they are different processes with dramatically different results and thus are not the same.
Morgan, your "well-thought out" position is misguided despite the fact that you consider yourself to be a "scientific" person. I'm not saying that there isn't merit to the concern that crossing genes between animals and plants might have unintended (and potentially negative) consequences, but the actual science of the matter dictates that genes are simply chemicals put together in various ways and there is nothing inherently unique between a plant and an animal gene. The uniqueness comes from how the genes are assembled together to make an organism. Thus in that sense, there are many potential issues with cross breeding plants with plants. Ergo, if you want to base your argument on the danger of mixing plants and animals together but you're not worried about cross breeding plants with plants, well then, you don't understand science as well as you think (said the snotty professional scientist from his ivory tower...*grin*).

And your ethical position? That is also misguided. For example, golden rice has been held up from production in part by the crack-pot complaining of anti-GMO wack jobs despite the fact that it could have transformative nutritional benefits for a truly gigantic portion of the world's poor population. Now THAT is an ethical travesty...only the travesty is being delivered courtesy of the "ethical" GMO activists. Uggh, sometimes idealistic liberals give us pragmatic liberals a damn headache.
M Mobley · · Bar Harbor, ME · Joined Mar 2006 · Points: 911

Omg Monsanto just wants to feed the poor and suffering in the world and the anti GMO crackpots are holding up the process... Are you fucking kidding? I think you've been fed a load of hot crap myself, I'm with all of Europe on this, ban all GMO franken-food

Kid Icarus · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2011 · Points: 15
England wrote: Not all of us have the funds to be beer snobs.
If this is all patriotism and economics, aren't there other cheap domestics available? Or did you just thrive on the extra added hipster cache?

Whatever happened to Lucky Lager?
Richard M. Wright · · Lakewood, CO · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 9,090

PBR to the Russians? Perfect, a match made in heaven.

Rigggs24 · · Denver, CO · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 45

Lets get this straight. Just because you do not think GMOs are all terrible does not mean you think Monsanto is a good company with great ethics. I dont like Monsanto. But im also not stupid enough to think all GMOs cause cancer and are bad for you. Many GMOs have very positive effects which is what J Albers was pointing out. Some have negative effects. I have no problem with labeling everything but i do have a problem with banning GMOs when some are the direct reason for thousands of people around the world not dieing from starvation. People protest these things without knowing the repercussions of their actions.

As with everything people want it to be black and white when it is always grey. Just because one GMO is bad does not make all bad. I know this is a simple concept but almost everyone ignores it.

Morgan Patterson · · NH · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 8,945
J. Albers wrote: Morgan, your "well-thought out" position is misguided despite the fact that you consider yourself to be a "scientific" person.
I have a science degree from one of the top colleges in the country so yes I consider myself a scientific person w2ho has studied the subjects to some degree. I understand the point you're trying to make "its all the same" but the fact that one is an evolved natural process and the other is the tinkering of genetic code in a science lab makes a very large difference both in ethical considerations and in matters of fact. That you don't recognize those as having merit I think speaks more to a bias on your side.
christopher adams · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 0
Rigggs24 wrote: As with everything people want it to be black and white when it is always grey. Just because one GMO is bad does not make all bad. I know this is a simple concept but almost everyone ignores it.
QFT.

Golden Rice is the perfect example of a GMO (food crop specifically) that could do the world good.

Guess what else?

Anyone know a type one diabetic? Guess how their insulin is made? GMO. Biologic medicine is all manufactured via GMO. This includes the vast majority of latest generation cancer drugs that have fewer side effects and better outcomes.

People always fear what they don't understand.

Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it dangerous.
Tom Sherman · · Austin, TX · Joined Feb 2013 · Points: 433
Morgan Patterson wrote: flounders to mate with those tomatoes and produce viable offspring... as a scientific person...
As a scientific person you're doing a pretty bad job of the unbiased argument.

"I love it when the guy from the auto-body shop tinkers with my car" - Said no one ever

You keep trying to use words to make this an emotional argument. This is 2014, you have a cell phone in your pocket, vaccines in your blood, and have been eating GMO foods for over 3 decades. Bet you wouldn't argue a prosthetic if you needed it? What is the point here?

I'm willing to bet you weren't even birthed naturally, i know i wasn't....

Edit: and I f@#$%^ like PBR
England · · Colorado Springs · Joined Aug 2008 · Points: 270
Kid Icarus wrote: If this is all patriotism and economics, aren't there other cheap domestics available? Or did you just thrive on the extra added hipster cache? Whatever happened to Lucky Lager?
I've been enjoying PBR since my hay bailing days back in WV(twenty years ago), and way before the hipster thing. I've switched to Old Mill, but need to do some research to see if it's still American owned. Lucky Lager??? educated me.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "PBR sold to the Russians! & bull$ !t GMO disscu…"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.