|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Codex Alimentarius
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
|
This Conspiracy theories related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information. |
| ||
|
| ||||
Seriously[edit]
We really should make a point about how thoroughly predictable conspiracy nuts are and how they are far less creative than they appear. Seriously I would bet all of the TEA IN CHINA that the sole reason why this stupid book is subject to conspiracy theories is because it has a scary Latin name. We should not hesitate to bang this point over there heads over and over and over again simply even if only for our own amusement. Alsto003 (talk) 06:17, 17 February 2015 (UTC) Alex
- Caesar adsum iam forte, Pompey aderat might be appropriate here (say the words to get the meaning). Anna Livia (talk) 16:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)