World-wide March against Monsanto tomorow

[Katzndogz]

Liberal food bans are more controlling of the food supply than Monsanto.

 

[eflatminor]

Liberal food bans are more controlling of the food supply than Monsanto.

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

 

[Pogo]

Monsanto is buying up as many seed companies as they can and discontinuing what isn't theirs. And it is total BS that Monsanto is "feeding the world". The shit they are growing is being turned into Doritos and Coca Cola. Now they're fucking with honeybees, which pollinate 90% of what we eat.

-- and they also bought the leading bee research firm to control that there dialogue.



I 'spect thar's some folks out thar what just ain't payin' attention.

 

[Pogo]

Liberal food bans are more controlling of the food supply than Monsanto.

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto...

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

Genetic pollution: ideas so bad they have to be inevitable.

It's what happens when we're arrogant enough to fuck with Mother Nature.

 

[eflatminor]

Liberal food bans are more controlling of the food supply than Monsanto.

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto.

No, the OP did not mention that at all.

How is someone that get's their field involuntarily pollinated a 'buyer'?

Either way, it's a completely different topic. You might consider starting a thread.

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

Genetic pollution: ideas so bad they have to be inevitable.

It's what happens when we're arrogant enough to fuck with Mother Nature.

Genetic pollution? Pretty sure mankind has been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. What exactly are you concerned about?

Fucking with Mother Nature? Does that include using technology to grow enough food to feed everyone? Or should we let Mother Nature see to it that populations starve?

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Monsanto is buying up as many seed companies as they can and discontinuing what isn't theirs. And it is total BS that Monsanto is "feeding the world". The shit they are growing is being turned into Doritos and Coca Cola. Now they're fucking with honeybees, which pollinate 90% of what we eat.

Just buy HEIRLOOM seeds. Then you'll never need to buy seeds again.

 

[Pogo]

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto.

No, the OP did not mention that at all.

How is someone that get's their field involuntarily pollinated a 'buyer'?

Either way, it's a completely different topic. You might consider starting a thread.

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

Genetic pollution: ideas so bad they have to be inevitable.

It's what happens when we're arrogant enough to fuck with Mother Nature.

Genetic pollution? Pretty sure mankind has been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. What exactly are you concerned about?

That ^^ would be... all together now... VOLUNTARY modification.
My concern (personally) is that I want some assurance that I can ("can" = am able to) buy produce/processed foods that do not involve Frankenfoods.

You want to ingest that stuff? Be my jest. But I should have the same choice. Funny for a guy who wants to throw the word "statism" around you're kinda OK with corporatism's ideas so good they have to be mandatory. See the difference? Me neither.

Fucking with Mother Nature? Does that include using technology to grow enough food to feed everyone? Or should we let Mother Nature see to it that populations starve?

Depends what the technology is, but congrats on the Appeal to Emotion argument. I thought it would be here much sooner. Guess Marty had to take the ad hominem for a walk first.

 

[TemplarKormac]

HEY HEY! HO HO!

Monsanto has got to go!

 

[Missourian]

Liberal food bans are more controlling of the food supply than Monsanto.

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto...

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

Genetic pollution: ideas so bad they have to be inevitable.

It's what happens when we're arrogant enough to fuck with Mother Nature.

I read that, but I later learned that it was only partially true.

Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds, Busted : The Salt : NPR

 

[Pogo]

Plus, while Monsanto sells it's products to VOLUNTARY buyers, liberal food bans are anything but.

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto...

Statism - Ideas so good they have to be mandatory...

Genetic pollution: ideas so bad they have to be inevitable.

It's what happens when we're arrogant enough to fuck with Mother Nature.

I read that, but I later learned that it was only partially true.

Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds, Busted : The Salt : NPR

Thanks for that link. The "Myth 3" section confirms exactly what I'm talking about with geneitc pollution:

>> organic producers typically do try to minimize the presence of GMOs, because their customers don't want them. It's usually not too hard to keep contamination to a very low level. But there are crops &#8212; specifically canola and corn &#8212; in which it's extremely difficult to eliminate it entirely. <<

I don't believe Schmeiser is the "only" such event (nor does the writer say it is). When I get time I'll go find some and I'll bring 'em to ya.

 

[eflatminor]

No mention of the INVOLUNTARY buyers who get their field pollinated by a neighbor's GM crop, and then get the pants sued off them by Monsanto.

No, the OP did not mention that at all.

How is someone that get's their field involuntarily pollinated a 'buyer'?

Either way, it's a completely different topic. You might consider starting a thread.



Genetic pollution? Pretty sure mankind has been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. What exactly are you concerned about?

That ^^ would be... all together now... VOLUNTARY modification.

As is the case with Monsanto...unless you have some evidence that government is forcing companies to genetically modify food. If you do, please let us know, because I would stand against it.

My concern (personally) is that I want some assurance that I can ("can" = am able to) buy produce/processed foods that do not involve Frankenfoods.

Again, we've been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. Have you ever had a Russet potato? It came about 100 years ago due to farmers genetically modifying their crops. So one more time, what exactly do you fear?

You want to ingest that stuff? Be my jest. But I should have the same choice. Funny for a guy who wants to throw the word "statism" around you're kinda OK with corporatism's ideas so good they have to be mandatory. See the difference? Me neither.

Jesus Christ, you just couldn't be this stupid. Where exactly did I suggest that the actions of a corporation should be mandatory? I did not, obviously.

If you really are incapable of understanding the difference between government enforced mandates and actions of an organization acting freely to sell their products, well, there really is no hope for you.

Fucking with Mother Nature? Does that include using technology to grow enough food to feed everyone? Or should we let Mother Nature see to it that populations starve?

Depends what the technology is, but congrats on the Appeal to Emotion argument. I thought it would be here much sooner. Guess Marty had to take the ad hominem for a walk first.

Way to avoid the point. But one thing is clear: you've suggested that if you don't approve of the technology, it's okay if people starve. Sounds like a central planner to me.

For someone that comes off as really passionate about this subject, your ability to articulate a point of view is shit.

 

[martybegan]

Monsanto is buying up as many seed companies as they can and discontinuing what isn't theirs. And it is total BS that Monsanto is "feeding the world". The shit they are growing is being turned into Doritos and Coca Cola. Now they're fucking with honeybees, which pollinate 90% of what we eat.

-- and they also bought the leading bee research firm to control that there dialogue.



I 'spect thar's some folks out thar what just ain't payin' attention.

It was actually ONE bee research firm, and the firm's focus was on making something that would "cure" CCD, not research into what was causing it and preventing it.

But calling it "leading" makes Monsanto sound much more scary.

 

[Pogo]

Nice. Strip out the quote links so it will be more work to answer. Cute.

No, the OP did not mention that at all.

How is someone that get's their field involuntarily pollinated a 'buyer'?

Either way, it's a completely different topic. You might consider starting a thread.



Genetic pollution? Pretty sure mankind has been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. What exactly are you concerned about?

That ^^ would be... all together now... VOLUNTARY modification.

As is the case with Monsanto...unless you have some evidence that government is forcing companies to genetically modify food. If you do, please let us know, because I would stand against it.



Again, we've been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. Have you ever had a Russet potato? It came about 100 years ago due to farmers genetically modifying their crops. So one more time, what exactly do you fear?



Jesus Christ, you just couldn't be this stupid. Where exactly did I suggest that the actions of a corporation should be mandatory? I did not, obviously.

If you really are incapable of understanding the difference between government enforced mandates and actions of an organization acting freely to sell their products, well, there really is no hope for you.

Fucking with Mother Nature? Does that include using technology to grow enough food to feed everyone? Or should we let Mother Nature see to it that populations starve?

Depends what the technology is, but congrats on the Appeal to Emotion argument. I thought it would be here much sooner. Guess Marty had to take the ad hominem for a walk first.

Way to avoid the point. But one thing is clear: you've suggested that if you don't approve of the technology, it's okay if people starve. Sounds like a central planner to me.

For someone that comes off as really passionate about this subject, your ability to articulate a point of view is shit.

1/ The government does not cause plants to pollinate; nature does. When that pollination is polluted, you've infiltrated my food supply. Maybe I don't want my tortilla to contain glyphosate. Ever think of that?

2/ Utter bullshit. We've been hybridizing, not grafting genes. That's in no way the same thing. A tomato is never going to mate with a salmon. Trust me on this.

3/ if the meaning of "mandatory" is over your tiny little head here, re-read #1.

4/ "Starving" is a red straw herring. You're hawking the assumption that Frankenfoods feed more people. I'm not buying that particular fertilizer.

Once again, you want to eat that shit, be my jest. Just as I don't force you to eat Nature's actual product, so you don't get to force me to eat Frankenfood. Genetics is forever.
Ain't rocket surgery.

 

[eflatminor]

Nice. Strip out the quote links so it will be more work to answer. Cute.

That ^^ would be... all together now... VOLUNTARY modification.

As is the case with Monsanto...unless you have some evidence that government is forcing companies to genetically modify food. If you do, please let us know, because I would stand against it.



Again, we've been genetically modifying foodstuffs since the beginning of civilization. Have you ever had a Russet potato? It came about 100 years ago due to farmers genetically modifying their crops. So one more time, what exactly do you fear?



Jesus Christ, you just couldn't be this stupid. Where exactly did I suggest that the actions of a corporation should be mandatory? I did not, obviously.

If you really are incapable of understanding the difference between government enforced mandates and actions of an organization acting freely to sell their products, well, there really is no hope for you.

Depends what the technology is, but congrats on the Appeal to Emotion argument. I thought it would be here much sooner. Guess Marty had to take the ad hominem for a walk first.

Way to avoid the point. But one thing is clear: you've suggested that if you don't approve of the technology, it's okay if people starve. Sounds like a central planner to me.

For someone that comes off as really passionate about this subject, your ability to articulate a point of view is shit.

1/ The government does not cause plants to pollinate; nature does.

Neither does Monsanto. One more time, that has nothing to do with the OP.

2/ Utter bullshit. We've been hybridizing, not grafting genes. That's in no way the same thing.

Actually, it has the exact same effect. Only it's more efficient. So what? You sound like someone rejecting modernity. Good luck with that.

A tomato is never going to mate with a salmon. Trust me on this.

#1, I do NOT trust you. #2, No shit Sherlock.

3/ if the meaning of "mandatory" is over your tiny little head here, re-read #1

So you're capable of an ad hominem attack. Truly impressive.

Clearly, no one is forcing anyone to genetically modify foods. If you don't like the idea that Mother Nature cross pollinates foods and always has, grow your own damn food.

4/ "Starving" is a red straw herring. You're hawking the assumption that Frankenfoods feed more people. I'm not buying that particular fertilizer.

God you're either willfully ignorant or just plain stupid. Genetic modification of foods has saved billions from starvation and will continue to do so. One of many examples:

Norman Borlaug - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Borlaug led the introduction of these high-yielding varieties combined with modern agricultural production techniques...and he is often credited with saving over a billion people worldwide from starvation.

Once again, you want to eat that shit, be my jest.

Don't need your permission. Don't care what you think.

Just as I don't force you to eat Nature's actual product

Then what the fuck are we talking about? What exactly are you suggesting be done with regard to Monsanto and all the other companies/farmers/co-ops/organizations/individuals involved in genetic manipulation of foodstuffs?

Genetics is forever

Now that's cute. Stupid as shit, but cute. On one hand, you bitch about changing genetics but your little slogan implies they're static.

You really do come off as thick. Really thick.

 

[Pogo]

YOU began the ad hominem, Gummo. You fling it, you get it flung back.
Stop the infantile whining and grow up.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm going to buy a carton of organic eggs so I can throw them at the protestors.

 

[eflatminor]

YOU began the ad hominem, Gummo. You fling it, you get it flung back.
Stop the infantile whining and grow up.

Brilliant retort. The specificity...the logic...the reason! Truly impressive.

Fail...once again.

 

[Pogo]

I'll put this in the Monsanto thread but serving here as a current story/epilogue:

Pesticides Make a Comeback
Many Corn Farmers Go Back to Using Chemicals as Mother Nature Outwits Genetically Modified Seeds

>> Syngenta, one of the world&#8217;s largest pesticide makers, reported that sales of its major soil insecticide for corn, which is applied at planting time, more than doubled in 2012. Chief Financial Officer John Ramsay attributed the growth to &#8220;increased grower awareness&#8221; of rootworm resistance in the U.S. Insecticide sales in the first quarter climbed 5% to $480 million.

The frustrating part is that rootworms&#8217; resistance to the Bt corn gene was entirely predictable &#8212; so predictable that some companies seized it as a financial opportunity:

American Vanguard bought a series of insecticide companies and technologies during the past decade, betting that insecticide demand would return as Bt corn started losing its effectiveness. In the past couple of years, that wager has paid off. <<

Duh.

 

[Pogo]

YOU began the ad hominem, Gummo. You fling it, you get it flung back.
Stop the infantile whining and grow up.

Brilliant retort. The specificity...the logic...the reason! Truly impressive.

Fail...once again.

So you want to fling rhetorical turds and then cry when it comes back...
Take off the shiny shoes (what is this, 1936?) and get the big boy pants on, troll boy.

By the way your appeal to emotion about "feeding the hungry" is bullshit. Doesn't work that way. Go see the Monsanto thread, this is about a march, which by now is over.

Dumb shit.

 

[eflatminor]

Dumb shit.

Aw, did someone get his little feelings hurt? That can happen when you fail so badly, you can only resort to childish name calling. Some of us have evolved beyond the grade school playground. You keep trying and perhaps some day...

"feeding the hungry" is bullshit

You keep telling yourself that.

Modernity wins over antiquity every time. You and the Taliban can stand against scientific advancement all you like. Won't mean a damn thing to the rest of society.

Science will continue to feed the world. You can subsist on twigs and bark for all anyone cares.