There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
Talk:Codex Alimentarius
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)