A measly 39K hits on big-G; no idea (yet..) if only the occasional PBS station carried it: seems odd, even for traditional Murican apathy towards all things cerebral. The posited incestuous relationships behind the Fed's don't worry your pretty head responses to all challenges, their baldfaced lying re. "consensus" of scientists: would provide adequate material for lIbel suits by many of the named, were their assertions bogus.

(I missed hearing about it; saw first time on KQED this PM.) It's a massive compilation of quotations by authors of (fleetingly shown) papers from which the comments are excerpted. There was no Intro on the topic, on the content, on any provenance, let alone: any rebuttals or even attempts at such.

In sum: this is a massive collection of seemingly non-hysterical competent Pros in their named fields, who are describing the most cynical and pervasive Corporate evasion of 'due diligence' imaginable, via Monsanto's CIEIO moving from corporate to an FDA position of huge influence, then back to Monsanto: all under the aegis of "feeding the world" (preparations for billions more, sans any hint of an alternative, say: seriously contemplating, investigating any sane means of reducing the birth-rate.)

As we have become collectively inured to the fact of Lying in bizness and government--for seeing the evidence all around--there seems to be a corollary effect, (probably measurable? via a decently supervised poll? of the effects of this 1 hr. film upon people across the spectrum of scientific education, from little to much. Is it cognitive dissonance? behind the apathy: the non-response to a posited conspiracy of such magnitude as dwarfs any (successful) scheme) of this magnitude (Teapot Dome? not even close..)

Nov. '14 Oregon referendum results.

Oregon's mandatory GMO-labeling initiative was voted down by a narrow margin Tuesday, capping the state's costliest ballot measure on record.

Measure 92 trailed by 1.2 percent, with fewer than 51 percent of voters in opposition.

By the time voting ended, the initiative had divided the Portland metro area. Multnomah County voters supported mandatory labeling, but Washington and Clackamas counties opposed it.

The measure was especially unpopular in eastern and central Oregon. The measure appeared on track to lose in nearly every county east of the Interstate 5 corridor, with the exception of Hood River County on Oregon's northern border.

However, it won support in the mid-Willamette Valley and in southern Oregon's Curry and Jackson counties. Jackson County approved a controversial GMO crops ban earlier this year.

Spending on both sides of the controversial proposal shattered all records for Oregon ballot measures.

Backers of the measure raised more than $8 million – a record for any "yes" side in an Oregon ballot measure campaign.

So again: was anyone here aware of this flic in '12? Saw it? [Link to free full video: is a few down the Google page.]

Yes, lots of Woo--clue: there's nary a soupçon of Yays in it. But obfuscation of some selective data-taking, to further an esoteric agenda nullifies, is counterproductive to demanding further oversights--as very well might be needed.

Figured next task was to proceed as you did: (Who He? ..reason I asked if anyone saw this in '12.) Odd that PBS seems to have demonstrated no more diligence than any YouTube screed
--simply dropping it there, sans Intro or comments on the source.

Academic Review seems thorough, but I have to wade through their topic summaries, particularly re. random fragments created along with the intended insertions.. I don't think we're finished with constructing the unusual oversights which DNA-for-profit demands: it's a bizness now. And all that implies. Were there an area for fear to be mongered, I'd place that squarely on the concept that "you can trust a bizness decision; if it's profitable, it must be safe." Food-like substances, anyone? If you don't ƒeare those ... (and they're still in most schools, in the dis-US.) DNA-for-profit -vs- fast-food: which is the scarier?

'General Science' is not enough for a CIEIO to decide which? specific-unknowns in your product.. matter. See: fracking/aquifers and "don't worry; we know what we're doing".
It's 2014, and the improbable has become a familiar, on many equally fraught topics, while the recklessness of Corporate has become a daily given. To be less than paranoid about Blankenship clones would be dumb.

Will do my homework on next weird essay--thanks for the Archive.org tip; Maybe Google-pro would have been best; general Google is becoming a morass. (Do we yet know the effects of those Paid-sortings?)