The Health Ranger Might Want to Kill You


zyklon        potato


Mike “Health Ranger” Adams is on the warpath. The frequent guest host of The Alex Jones Show has enjoyed an unprecedented amount of mainstream attention this year, even appearing on Dr. Oz’s TV show in May to discuss his shiny new “food lab” (where he diligently searches for trace amounts of heavy metals in processed foods and beverages). But Adams has a deeply paranoid side, and that side came out roaring last week. On Monday, July 21, he published a glorious example of Godwin’s Law on his Natural News website: “Biotech genocide, Monsanto collaborators and the Nazi legacy of ‘science’ as justification for murder.”
In the tradition of Ben Stein’s “science leads to killing people“, this piece argues that biotech in the food industry is analogous to the (pseudo)science used to justify the Holocaust. Publications that support GMOs, then, are every bit as bad as the German institutions that funded Nazi medical experiments – they are “Monsanto collaborators”, in Adams’ words. Journalists who criticize the Food Babe, Dr. Mercola, or Adams himself are members of a “radical cult”, enablers of “GMO genocide.”

As always, Adams’ evidence that GMOs are deadly is absurdly thin. He cites the Seralini rat study as proof that GMOs cause cancer, and that’s basically it. This article isn’t any different from all his other anti-GMO rants, until he gets to the part about a recent speech by German President Joachim Gauck, in which Gauck commended the key players in Operation Valkyrie (the failed attempt to assassinate Hitler in 1944). Adams interprets Gauck’s central message thusly:

it is the moral right — and even the obligation — of human beings everywhere to actively plan and carry out the killing of those engaged in heinous crimes against humanity.” (emphasis in original)

He goes on to list some Monsanto collaborators (wiki editors, leftist publications, food companies, etc.) before issuing a call to arms, encouraging someone to

“create a website listing all the publishers, scientists and journalists who are now Monsanto propaganda collaborators. I have no doubt such a website would be wildly popular and receive a huge influx of visitors, and it would help preserve the historical record of exactly which people contributed to the mass starvation and death which will inevitably be unleashed by GMO agriculture (which is already causing mass suicides in India and crop failures worldwide).”

Someone heeded that call almost instantly. Just as Tea Party websites popped up within 24 hours of Rick Santelli’s CNBC rant back in 2009, a Monsanto Collaborators site manifested just days after the Health Ranger’s creepy Nazi article was posted. It features an image of Auschwitz, superimposed with the names of several journalists and science writers who have criticized anti-GMO activism, defended GMOs, or questioned the Seralini study. There are links to stories about the “GMO” suicides among Indian farmers (a myth that has been debunked here, here, and here), and an ominous declaration that “responsibility for these deaths falls upon those individuals and organizations shown on this site.”

This is precisely what Adams wanted to see. In his July 21st article, he expressed the hope that the anti-GMO community will spawn a few Simon Wiesenthals, willing to track down Monsanto collaborators so they can be brought to justice. It should be noted that he attempted to soften his Valkyrie analogy by stating that he does not condone vigilante action, and would simply like to see Nuremberg-style trials for cereal manufacturers and science reporters.
Adams warned that anyone who becomes a Monsanto hunter should hide behind total anonymity, for his very life will be in danger. And that’s exactly what the creator of the Monsanto Collaborators site tried to do.

Here’s where things get a little weird. Adams, in an update to his article, stridently denies that he played any part in the website’s creation, and even urges his fellow activists to avoid it. Being a seasoned conspiracy theorist, he reasons that Monsanto Collaborators was put up by the “biotech mafia” to discredit anti-GMO activists (he also believes the biotech industry ensnares journalists and activists in elaborate sexual blackmail schemes, in order to turn them into shills). However, the Genetic Literary Project claims it has confirmed that Adams is the financial backer of the new website. Sadly, they haven’t provided any evidence of that to date.
UPDATE: As I was writing this post yesterday, This Week in Pseudoscience posted the results of their examination of, and there are strong indications that the site was put up by someone in the Health Ranger’s inner circle. The most compelling indicator is that Adams’ article didn’t appear anywhere online until after 11:00 PM (GMT) on July 21. It was posted to Facebook at 11:05 (GMT), and the first comment on the Natural News article was made 10 minutes later. However, was registered earlier in the day, at 4:21 (GMT) in the afternoon.
(thanks to David)

To my knowledge, this is the first time that one of Alex Jones’ most popular guests has made implied threats of violent retribution against a perceived enemy. His bizarre outburst comes at a time when he is struggling to put his conspiracy-mongering behind him and rebrand himself as a saner, calmer health activist. It also comes at a time when the anti-Monsanto, anti-GMO movement is at peak strength, gaining thousands of new supporters by the second. Boycotts, petitions, and protest rallies are sprouting all over the planet and garnering serious attention from mainstream media outlets. And now, at this pivotal moment, Adams decides to unleash subtle threats of violence and false accusations of genocide? It seems that if anyone is inflicting severe damage to the anti-GMO cause, it’s Adams himself. If he keeps this up, he’ll become a very different kind of ranger…


16 thoughts on “The Health Ranger Might Want to Kill You

Add yours

      1. Oh, good. I enjoyed reading those. I think there is a growing anti-conspiracy movement, because more web sites like this are popping up, which is a good thing. All too often I hear perfectly ordinary, mainstream people use buzz words that I know come from Alex Jones. [Shudder].

        Your other web site, Uqbar Calling, is about Whitley Streiber’s bizarre claims. I must admit I like listening to his radio show. I don’t believe a word of what he says, but he is excellent at what he does, which is shovel bull. He injects the right amount of drama into his silliness. No matter what strange claims his guest makes, the same thing supposedly happened to Whitley. I enjoy it the same way I remember sitting around a campfire telling ghost stories as a kid. I knew they were made up, but they were fun to hear. And everything he says is pretty harmless, unlike Alex Jones and Mike Adams.

  1. I feel the same way about Strieber. He’s a fantastic storyteller – his “nonfiction” still gives me chills. For the most part, it’s harmless Coast-to-Coast style fun.

  2. Alex Jones and John Stadtmiller have both made violent threats on their programs over the years.

    Regarding Operation Valkyrie… that brings to mind Ray Comfort in one of his videos, might be “180” where he’s going around asking random people in the public if they knew what they know now, and could go back in time and kill Hitler’s mother so he couldn’t be born, would you do it? Almost all of them said yes. The ones who said no really had a problem with it. Those who approved, not so much. Comfort seemed to like the idea.

    What would you call it? Premeditated Murder? Self defense? Self preservation? Preventive Maintenance? Would it be something Jesus would approve of or does it reek of the thought police in the film, “The Minority Report?” Could it be likened to the same thing as seeing some guy harming a child so you go over and break a chair over his head knocking him out? I don’t think so.

  3. Seems science is always the deciding factor in a debate till the science goes against a big corporation, some how the non-corporate science is always discredited for some reason…hmmm….I wonder why that is? It couldn’t be that they stand to make Billions and billions as money has never corrupted science in years past or has it. So let’s take a look at the corporate science of Monsanto, which they pretty much buy from universities by throwing huge donations at them which intern lets them dictate the way they should perform their research therefore manipulating a favorable result, no conflict of interests there???? Or maybe start a think tank or important sounding group with a catchy biotech name that they secretly fund to push more PR, kind of like what Tabaco companies did years back, I mean cigarette companies were telling people for 40yrs that there was no connection to lung cancer and smoking meanwhile they had the studies sitting in their file cabinet proving it did, down right ruthless. Now we get to the science of the Seralini Study…. Who has more to gain???? I guess I’m more of a connect the dots/conspiracy type thinker or I just following the money. Well Seralini doesn’t have any scandals to list so lets skip back over to investigate Monsanto’s track record as they would NEVER LIE or not be forthcoming with information would they and if they did it would only be once, not quite. Nor would they ever get a hall pass for having long ties to the government being an ex-chemical weapons company supplying AGENT ORANGE in the Vietnam war and merged with IG Farben back in the Hitler regime which is why MIKE ADAMS makes the Hitler Science comment. Don’t think IG Farbens link to Hitler is a conspiracy either as it’s well known if you do any research that they supplied fluoride and other pharmaceutical’s to test on those poor Jews. Anyway, here’s a time line of Monsanto’s activities from 1901 to 2011 which is chock full of atrocities like dumping PCB waste in the river near a small town named Anniston in Alabama for 30yrs knowingly damaging the environment and drinking water, it only gave cancer to young black children and their parents, OH WELL….population control….they were fined 600 million for that by the way and the list goes on and on from Aspartame to terminator seeds. Yes, this is the company I want providing food for me and my family….so you keep eating those GMO’s if you think they are so healthy smart guy. I personally would believe the Seralini study as opposed to lie spewing Monsanto with their Corporate Science for profits no matter who gets sick history…and that can’t be disputed. Here’s a link you of Monsanto’s history you can try to explain away….have fun.

    1. @ Gary Pavlak,
      I’m not going to take the time to research and debunk your claims, but I know for a fact the “HItler gave the Jews fluoride” claim is a myth. The Germans were successfully prosecuted at Nuremberg because they were assiduous record keepers. They documented everything.

      However, there is not a single piece of documentation–not a purchase order, a memo, a letter written by a Nazi to his mother/wife back home, a private diary, nothing whatsoever–that backs up the claim that the Nazis used fluoride to pacify their Jewish prisoners. There simply is no evidence at all for this statement.

      No credible historian believes this claim, and yet conspiracy theorists repeat it over and over. It is the most oft-repeated urban legend, and it is entirely false.


      1. Its actually not hard to “debunk” claims like this guy makes. Most science is non-corporate. Its conducted with either government, or private, grants, in universities, by people that barely make more than your average high school teacher. Yes, you do have “corporate” science too, but its conducted by specific companies, seeking specific results, when its honest. When its not honest, its also not science at all, and is usually done by some think tank, like Cato – places which do no actual research, of any kind, but are instead paid purely to obscure the real facts, for companies trying to cover their asses. These think tanks are the same people who covered the cigarette companies asses, when denying cancer risks, then denied acid rain, and are not churning out bullshit denying climate change.

        Flouride wasn’t even invented during the time frame these sort of shill companies showed up. It was found, and researched, world wide, by people finding it in existing water sources, and wondering, “Gosh.. why do these people who drink this stuff have fewer problems with their teeth?”

        People like Mr. Pavlak are “convinced” that *all* scientists work for big Pharma, unless they are the supposedly “honest” ones, which make shit up, for big altie-med (which is rapidly growing to become just as much a multi-billion dollar, and dishonest, an industry as the one they are scared to death of).

  4. @kagehi,
    You’re absolutely right. Science is called “science” when there is independent, double-blind studies that are reproducible. The results are published so any other agency or entity can do the experiment themselves.

    Conspiracy theories serve an important function for people like gary pavlak. They like to think that the world is a secretive, scary place with nefarious groups out to get them. The only thing is, most people are too dumb to understand this, according to them. The idea that only a few people are smart enough to see the bigger picture is very empowering for them.

    1. I think you could go one further in that and state, “Conspiracy theorists take consent about the data, when not coming from them, but from multiple sources of independent research as **proof** that there is a conspiracy to validate the data, by claiming its true, and making up fake evidence to support it.”

      In other words – if you do science, at all, as its intended, you are part of a conspiracy. Its only of they hang around in your basement, hallucinating, and gluing together disconnected bits of absurd nonsense, which support your fear and phobias, that you are “doing science”. Real conspiracies are usually pretty damned obvious. Its only possible to sustain such a thing by keeping not just the public, but **everyone else** including the scientific community ignorant of the facts. The right wing does a fair job of this with the public, but.. funnily enough, they still can’t hide the fact that the same names come up, in **every** single case where they claim that science is wrong, and.. ironically, themselves, cry “conspiracy”, when denying facts that the actual science determined to be true decades ago, or even hundreds of years ago, and is just not “refining” the details about.

      And, of course, that is usually one of the arguments they give – “if you can’t define something to X decimal places, only Y decimal places, it might still be wrong!” It hardly matters to them if the uncertainty is like +- 0.1% or +-0.000001%, its still “not known well enough, so our nonexistent ‘alternative’ must be true!” Its like arguing with someone that you couldn’t have possibly driven to their house, where you car ran out of gas, because the “low fuel” light was already on when you started, then going, “Nah, nah, nah, nah, I can’t hear you.”, when you try to explain that the bloody light only says “low fuel”, not “no fuel”. Nope, still, “impossible”, as far as they are concerned…

  5. są chorowite wyłożyć suma komedii weselnych, wraz z ustronnymi, jeśli odliczają iż wybranie się
    na nie przyniesie im daną pociechę. Stanowią fantastycznie
    cyniczne również gdyby owszem ostatnie potrafię urzec – stałe.
    W 4 incydentach na 5 bezpośrednio zainteresowane zostawieniem pełnomocnictw do skoncentrowanego grosza.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: