It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

March Against Monsanto Explodes Globally

page: 2
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2015 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: jude11

I know what you are talking about, and still i see no complaints when driving your new car, or flying to Hawaii, about ten percent of this planet live with it, the rest uses it. All of the above is human factors and instincts. The "Elites" has the controll simply cause of the fact we are humans. You underestimate humans and instincts and think to highly of the elite.




posted on May, 24 2015 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueJacket

Oh wow, so u call the predatory genome a classic trait for us to mass slaughter everything and industrialize it. Im gonna give u a heads up, we are omnivorous, not carnivors. The Rh - genome can digest meat in a higher concentration and if i recall it its just 7% of the entire human population, its a trait that developed over 200.000 years, you and me are 35.000 years and probably Rh + genome, which means we actually shouldnt eat meat in the extent we do. But yet our instincts tells us to fill our bellys. So where u wanna go on the serious part? genetics?



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Aren't there close to 100 other companies that make GMOs? Are there any rallies protesting them?


Monsanto is clearly the 'poster child' for an evil corporation. The key is to take them down and the others will fall like dominoes. We have to start somewhere to stop this insanity. Glyphosate is destroying our planet.


If the goal is to take down GMO companies then it is a forgone conclusion such an endeavour will fail. If the goal was to change the way they operated then that would be attainable.

Even if it was possible to remove GMOs that would not affect the use of herbicides such as glyphosate. If they were focusing on Herbicides then it may be possible to change some regulations. Unfortunately none seems to be the case and these rallies will simply be a minor inconvenience to those companies.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 07:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DiddyMcCoy

chose this post after reading all your others just to confirm your one of those people.

you know what i say to to those people?

what don't you step up and set a good example, and become a role model and be one of the first ones to have their lifespan shortened. that would be a great start.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Mine is shortened, i know exactly what i am digesting, you think monsanto is the biggest perpetrator if you only knew the # you are putting in your body it would make monsanto look like a mosquito compared to an elephant, difference i understand while you define a purpose. Enjoy life and love, instead of living in fear and not living.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Monsanto has previously denied that its products have any adverse impacts on human health or the environment. In an email statement to CBC News, Monsanto spokeswoman Trish Jordan said "as a leader in the industry, our company is in the spotlight with activists."

"The 300 employees who work here in Canada, including me, believe in what we are doing to help farmers produce more from their land while conserving natural resources, such as water and energy," she said. 



Conserving natural resources?? WTF! They are not natural when they have been genetically modified. There is next to zero natural canola left in Canada. It is all GMO now because GMO has poisoned all the feilds to their likeness.

Monsanto has not conserved "natural" resources, they have irradicated them.

I wonder sometimes if we are being terraformed. What else could drive interests to make air, water, and soil, so different from what was our own with such intent and in such little time. It is madness if it is without purpose.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Natural resources are materials and components things that can be used that can be found within the environment.


The crops would not be considered a natural resource. Like it said "water, energy" would both be resources.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:29 PM
link   
There's not much point in marching against Monsanto globally, as about the only place that they're actually allowed to plant or sell anything is in the USA and Canada.

They're already banned in most other countries, and in major areas like the EU, Australia, etc.

They're only allowed to sell their GMO crops in places where they are able to pay off the politicians, like the widespread corruption in the United States.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies




They're already banned in most other countries, and in major areas like the EU, Australia, etc.


Does 26 countries qualify as most?
edit on 24-5-2015 by Grimpachi because: fix



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Natural resources are materials and components things that can be used that can be found within the environment.


The crops would not be considered a natural resource. Like it said "water, energy" would both be resources.


What about the soil?

...smart ass.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Don't forget the Ukraine. Now that there are only western interests in control and nobody to stand up for her, she will likely fall to GMO soon. 7th largest grain exporter and some of the finest black soil on earth. Monsanto and Cargill will see that beautiful soil become modified.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Your calling me a smart ass because you thought the crops were the resource?

Isn't that the same as blaming me for your mistake?

Anyway, the soil would probably be considered a resource especially acreage wise. If they can plant more crops per acre then it would be conserved. Although I am not sure about that I am just guessing.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: DiddyMcCoy

Seriously ?

It is obvious you use plastics, wear clothing, have leather something, eat something that no longer lives-- for your own dining pleasure; Do you wash in clay or dirt, by chance? The oil you know you use came from something at one time.

We all know what you put into your body...hot air!



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Aren't there close to 100 other companies that make GMOs? Are there any rallies protesting them?

They aren't big enough to have an opposition that gets paid well to oppose them using fear tactics. Sure they screw the little farmer. Sure they introduce chemicals to help that hurt animals and bugs. They buy off politicians left right and centre, but I wonder how many people would give a flying something if the fear wasn't in their face all the time?

GMOs have done some wonderful things too, just people can't admit that there is good with the bad....at least on here.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: MALBOSIA

Your calling me a smart ass because you thought the crops were the resource?

Isn't that the same as blaming me for your mistake?

Anyway, the soil would probably be considered a resource especially acreage wise. If they can plant more crops per acre then it would be conserved. Although I am not sure about that I am just guessing.


I say that assuming you know damn well what I meant. A "natural" soil field would not be "round-up ready" for some GMO seed.

Soil is the most important resource next to water. We cannot grow natural seed on GM contaminated soil.

Sure if you classify all food stuff as equal regardless of genetic make-up then round-up is allowing more food to be grown per acre. Mostly due to weeds and bugs being removed from the equation.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Is this March Against Monsanto about the company, or about GMOs?



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




We cannot grow natural seed on GM contaminated soil.
Why not?
How do GM plants contaminate soil?



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Ultralight

Exactly the point thats relevant, do you understand it? Take nature into context, do you fill a function in nature`? or you just alive? cause u just alive? Do you live in harmony with nature or you a cancer ?
You cant see it can you? You wanna know why, living as a parasite you justify your needs. Cause it fills your needs and way beyond it, thats what you defend, cause it makes you feel like a God.
Nothing is obvious when its used for no good.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: MALBOSIA




I say that assuming you know damn well what I meant. A "natural" soil field would not be "round-up ready" for some GMO seed.

Soil is the most important resource next to water. We cannot grow natural seed on GM contaminated soil.



I have never heard that one before and I am fairly certain your wrong but if you have links saying otherwise I will be sure to look at them.



posted on May, 24 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MALBOSIA




We cannot grow natural seed on GM contaminated soil.
Why not?
How do GM plants contaminate soil?


A round-up ready feild will kill anything that is not sold by Monsanto. That does not sound contaminated to you?

Then there is cross contamination. Plants that get pollinated through wind or insect are being contaminated by gmo versi9ns of their kind and farmers not intending to put GMO on the market have no control over the matter.


.

In GM crop fields, pollen drift and insect pollination create obvious problems for nearby non-GM or organic crops. Sugar beet, Maize and oil seed rape pollen is light enough to travel long distances. Unfortunately identifying cross contaminated plants is only possible by laboratory testing.

Wheat is a crop of huge commercial importance. Wheat mostly self-pollinates and its pollen is quite heavy, meaning that it does not tend to drift far, but it still can, especially because wheat is a relative of some grasses that can act as recipients for its pollen and this is known as horizontal gene transfer.

Is Prevention Possible?

Because of the inevitability of contamination of non-GM crops with GM pollen, the EU has established recommendations for thresholds of these inevitable contaminations. It also has guidance for buffer zones.



GMO contamination

I worry I may be in for a long one with you after calling you "the old guy" in another thread earlier.



new topics

top topics



 
65
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join