Problem one, I can see it clocks in at 28 minutes. That's a long time to present clear and concise evidence.
First line in the video is "These are companies with decades and decades of well documented lying to the American public."
That is guilt by association and a baseless assertion.
2nd line is another baseless assertion trying to establish opposition being silenced.
That's 3 logical fallacies in 16 seconds.
More claims, with no evidence.
The third minute contains a lot of claims about the findings of scientists and their supposed views on the topic, with nothing sited, no evidence of any kind.
Next we have some red herrings, plus linking to Monsanto, which no doubt will lead to guilt by association later. Then a PHD is quickly paraded on there to make it more convincing (proof by authority logical fallacy.)
Next they try to say it's the same as smoking and agent orange. That's a classic propaganda technique.
Next claims about soy, without evidence.
Later they try to claim genes may jump from food to gut bacteria. That just isn't possible. You can cause bacteria to evolve by changing their environment, but the genes can't just get into them. That's absurd.
antibiotic resistant bacteria?! LMFAO! This just gets more ridiculous as it goes. I think they are counting on people being convinced by this point and just blindly swallowing the rest.
I clicked on their references link in the FAQ. It was full of testimony and articles people wrote. Even stuff that was labeled as research or a study, but when you clicked on it it was just more testimony.
If there is any truth to any of this at all whatsoever, then why is there no evidence at all? Can they not simply point to even one peer reviewed study? I don't think they can. I have not been able to find any, and no GMO conspiracy theorist can either. Every piece of supposed evidence they point to is this sort of ridiculous propaganda.
They talk about all kinds of studies, and give all sorts of information from these studies. WHERE ARE THEY? With all their links to article after article of testimony, why do they not have links to ANY of these studies? Until I see some, I must conclude that they do not exist.