http://sn.1w6.org/file/bobjonkman-20140127T183129-3mv8r3y.html

That article is full of weasel words ("may", "could", "might", "seems to"), makes fallacious arguments (genetically engineered chicken feed is heavily pesticided, pesticides are bad for chickens, therefore GE feed is bad for chickens), has factual errors ("unrelated species [of microorganisms] mate" — microorganisms are asexual, and different species don't mate[*]), and uses "Science" as a generic authority (" demonstrated by science", "Proven By Science", "science seems to suggest"). But the article is sprinkled with just enough true facts to make it believable (eg. Indian cotton infected with Monsanto's genes). And, of course, the web site is in the business of selling alternative foods, medicines, and medical devices, so that's a conflict of interest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Mercola !not !science [*]Yes, I know there are exceptions.