Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

GMO Crop Sabotage on the Rise

page: 5
90
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by rockn82
A great man once said "He who establishes his argument with noise and command, shows his reason is weak."


not a great quote - the left learned long ago that derision is as effective as reason. but the problem with the anti-GMO stance is that you'd rather let africa starve than confuse some grasshoppers. it's difficult to respond civilly to that level of inhumanity.




posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:48 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by obamuh
 


Surely you would not have children if you knew having them would be a death sentence for them. Yet, they continue to have children. Why? What is in inside a human that thinks even though they are starving they should invite a child to come into this world only to watch it wither die by their doing? Should we be sending all of Africa condoms? Should we continue to help those who do not wish to help themselves? I am rather certain they understand their plight. Trust me, I do understand your sentiment of wishing to save lives; but at what point do we draw the line? Do we kill the many to save the few? Do the ends justify the means? Why do you place the blame of the death of Africans on the shoulders of the people that take an "anti-GMO stance"? From your reasoning it would be fine to kill off every head of livestock on the planet so long as it sustained the populace even though it may lead to our eventual destruction.

"Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime."

My friend I will say just one last thing before I go. Every instance, every single one, of humans interfering with nature has lead to a terrible outcome.

Well Wishes



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by rockn82
Every instance, every single one, of humans interfering with nature has lead to a terrible outcome.


yah, screw flu shots and advil. jonas salk - what an asshole.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by rockn82
A great man once said "He who establishes his argument with noise and command, shows his reason is weak."


not a great quote - the left learned long ago that derision is as effective as reason. but the problem with the anti-GMO stance is that you'd rather let africa starve than confuse some grasshoppers. it's difficult to respond civilly to that level of inhumanity.


So you're saying that Africa is starving because of a lack of GMO crops? C'mon... you should know better than to set up such straw men and logical fallacies. The issues are not black and white. Sure, increasing agricultural production could feed more people... but increasing food production also has the inconvenient effect of increasing populations. That's why we're in the mess we're in now- totalitarian agriculture; take over land, raze it, turn it to domesticated monocultures, and use the massive surpluses to feed massive population growth. GMO is just the modern/advanced version of this and we're playing with some serious fire.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   
GMO crops are not the "savior" of Africa. They are toxic foods with some unknown, and some known toxic effects. This is "not" what I call food. Food nourishes you when you consume it. Am I supposed to run into Africa with a bowl of grapes and a bottle of round up to wash it down?

I'm not an anarchy supporter, but I do support people standing up for what is right.

The problem with desert regions is that these people either need to be moved to better land, or stop having children beyond what that desert land can support, or you somehow make the land more hospitable.

Again, GMO crops, as I currently know them, are not the solution. If you can produce a GM crop that nourishes, and is good for the body, and the environment, then I'll support it, but as things are now, no. The way they have modified these plants is creating problems, and many problems still may be unknown.

So, don't feel sorry for these bullies.

Troy
edit on 5-11-2010 by cybertroy because: needed to make changes



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by guavas
The only reason to genetically modify food is to increase profits.


Yeah. Heaps of profit once you have the patent for fruit and vegetables.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by SarK0Y
current GMO doesn't provide qualitative seeds + it can make dead zones to animals/insects/...


GMOs don't need to make qualitative seeds as long as seeds can be modified. and practically all industrial crops are dead zones for animals anyway, GMO or not.

no doubt, your point is completely right of industrial agriculture & yes -- we don't've to demonize state-of-the-art techs, in particular GMO. however, we need to apply new methods Just after detailed studies. in fact, modern agriculture cannot use croplands about long periods because of exhaustible soil. on other hand, GMO can Nothing to solve problem of exhaustible crop-Areas, moreover, it Just will worsen situation beyond point of no return. brainless usage of new techs is Great Evil, but no new techs per se.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boomer1941

Originally posted by obamuh
it's one thing to be against monsanto, but being against GMOs in general is sort of retarded. millions of people are getting the nutrients to survive that they wouldn't normally consume. if people really want the world fed, GMOs of all stripes will continue to be vital.


What happens when the seeds run out and the poor and needy can't afford to buy more. Why let the food supply be controlled by a corporation?


What happens when you have no seeds at all and someone offers you seed? Do you reject them, giving up your livelihood based on future inability to replant or do you accept them and work on a plan to replant when the crisis has been resolved?

Maybe it's a way for them to get their foot in the door, and I'm not privy to any agreements they'd have, but if it's a donation, they wouldn't be obligated in any way to continue to plant that seed.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SarK0Y

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by Boomer1941
What happens when the seeds run out and the poor and needy can't afford to buy more.


why will the seeds run out? and why won't there be other seeds? and don't you want the most nutritious crop possible EXACTLY when people can't afford to buy more?

current GMO doesn't provide qualitative seeds + it can make dead zones to animals/insects/...


You're grouping together all GMO again. Please don't. Not all GMO is harmful to the environment. And you need to quantify your statements if you're going to scare people with them.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by hawkiye
Americans,

French, Spanish, and Indian citizens called to let you know they found your testicles that have been missing for many decades...
edit on 5-11-2010 by hawkiye because: corrections


thanks,

we are still looking for your integrity and will keep you posted.


And still looking for your sense of humor too I see...



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by NoHierarchy

Originally posted by obamuh

Originally posted by rockn82
A great man once said "He who establishes his argument with noise and command, shows his reason is weak."


not a great quote - the left learned long ago that derision is as effective as reason. but the problem with the anti-GMO stance is that you'd rather let africa starve than confuse some grasshoppers. it's difficult to respond civilly to that level of inhumanity.


So you're saying that Africa is starving because of a lack of GMO crops? C'mon... you should know better than to set up such straw men and logical fallacies. The issues are not black and white. Sure, increasing agricultural production could feed more people... but increasing food production also has the inconvenient effect of increasing populations. That's why we're in the mess we're in now- totalitarian agriculture; take over land, raze it, turn it to domesticated monocultures, and use the massive surpluses to feed massive population growth. GMO is just the modern/advanced version of this and we're playing with some serious fire.


So what you're saying is, let them starve, because otherwise their GMO crops will kill everyone due to overpopulation? That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater in my opinion...



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Those French dont put up with much.

When are Americans going to wake up?



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
as far as gmo's go, nobody really knows what nasty effects they're going to have on our health in the future, but the obvious problems we can see are that it's all about the control that these companies have. it's not bad enough for these guys to f_ck around with our food in all ways imaginable, but the whole biotech thing is just a movement to monopolize our food supply, from the farmer who plants the seed all the way to the market. there are so many things wrong with this subject, i could go on and on, but i just have to say that the root to the whole problem is how aware the consumer is. the root to so many problems that the world has is that your "average joe" just doesn't give a sh-t. happily oblivious to everything that isn't a blatant invasion of his little bubble of self-centered consumerism.
if only "freedom of the press" actually meant something.
who knows the truth about anything that's happening all across the world? who can know? poor people might be lucky to get basic cable, which is the most obvious propaganda that's out there, though they might have internet access, they have to search, and search, to find any shred of truth about anything, then they need to find evidence to back it up.
the real tragedy is that the poor people are the ones who are taken advantage of. unknowing or even knowing slaves, who have know other choice, no other way of survival than to just give in and play the game.
and who can afford to eat organic? there is not middle class anymore. there is only slaves any overseers.
big businesses like monsanto keep pushing to make the whole world eat THEIR food, and they won't even eat it themselves, hell, they're the ones can afford not to.
whoever may be reading this post, or maybe even doing they're own research about things may know the truth, but what about the majority who just don't care? those who don't have the internet have such limited resources to get the truth from, how do we keep them informed? will they accept what you tell them?
not only must we keep informed for our own personal health, and while you may not really care about the health of the d1ckhead that lives down the street, his children don't have much of a choice what he puts on their dinner plate now do they? what they know is what he wants them to know, and this is how they come into the world, generation after generation, mindless consumers, who don't have the courage or even the time to care about things that don't seem to effect them. or maybe their just don't happen to be interested in the subject. is it a matter of interest, or is it a matter of just having a little bit of moral fiber in your diet as well as concern for the well being of those who are led blind-folded into the blender of capitalist greed?

just a little food for thought my friends,
here's a couple links for anybody who's new to the subject,
later

www.ornl.gov...
www.saynotogmos.org...
www.ethicalinvesting.com...
www.sourcewatch.org...
www.organicconsumers.org...
www.monsantosucks.com...



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
The environmental concern is valid. The other very real concern is the effect that these Frankenstein Foods, Franken Foods, Genetically Modified Foods, Genetically Modified Organisms "GMOs"; not the least of which are Bt-toxins and rBGH, have on our bodies.

Part of the issue is the fact that the giant food conglomerates who can fund these studies have no interest in doing so, or if they do, its on a short term basis.

Though efforts have been made to discredit him, Dr. Arpad Pusztai documented the effects of GMO foods on rats:


When Pusztai fed supposedly harmless GMOs to rats, they developed potentially pre-cancerous cell growth, smaller brains, livers and testicles, partially atrophied livers, and showed signs of a damaged immune system. Moreover, the results clearly indicated that the cause of the problem was due to the unpredictable side effects arising from the process of genetic engineering itself. In other words, his study suggested that the GM foods already on the market, which were created from the same process, might also create such effects.

When Dr Pusztai expressed his concern he was fired from his job of 35 years and silenced with threats of a lawsuit. His 20-member research team was disbanded, all testing protocols were abandoned, and the pro-GM establishment embarked on an extensive disinformation campaign to discredit the study’s results to protect the reputation of GM foods already in the marketplace.

www.seedsofdeception.com...


Once again, without fail, the FDA has abandoned the safety of the consumer over the profitability of the corporate state:


It’s easy to understand the FDA’s industry-friendly policy on regulation of GMOs when you see the revolving door between agency regulators and the companies they regulate.

The FDA has claimed it was not aware of any information showing that GM crops were different “in any meaningful or uniform way,” from non-GMO crops and therefore didn’t require testing. But 44,000 internal FDA documents made public by a lawsuit show that this was a complete lie.

The overwhelming consensus among the FDA’s own scientists was that GM foods were quite different and could lead to unpredictable and hard-to-detect allergens, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems. It turns out that FDA scientists, who had urged superiors to require long-term studies, were ignored.

www.seedsofdeception.com...



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by grahag
 



You're grouping together all GMO again. Please don't. Not all GMO is harmful to the environment. And you need to quantify your statements if you're going to scare people with them.

my friend, i didn't say "all GMO", i said "current GMO"
& look, Primary cause to grow GMO is to get most stable plants against outer factors(climatic zones, animals/insects/fungi/bacterias/viruses)+ minimal time to blossom up. but, in fact, we face two d(r)eadful troubles:
1. if whatEver Alive doesn't consume those plants, where are causes to conjecture plants shall be harmless for humans???
2. where are the techs to renew Croplands??? GMO only accelerate the devastation of soil.



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Mike Adams, the Health Ranger (www.naturalnews.com...), has a lot of great information on his website. Didnt know he had a rap "fetish".

edit on 5-11-2010 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   
The bottom line is, will the GMO crop nourish us, in other words, will our body accept it as good healthy food? And will the environment accept it, in other words will it decompose normally into usable compounds, and will it harm or help animals? If the GMO crop turns out to be toxic to either us or the environment, then we need to scratch it off the list as a viable alternative. PERIOD. If you are poisoning the body, then you aren't really "feeding" your body.

You can't just throw stuff out in the environment willy nilly and hope it works out. The USA turned a desert into what you know as Los Angeles. It's "artificial," but it shows what you can do by just piping in water and stuff. GMO crops weren't needed. I find it hard to believe any crop is really going to thrive in a hostile dry environment, like the desert, without an external source of water. Regular crops will work just fine with adequate water, and soil improvement. Is Monsanto going to now tell us that their seeds don't need a good water source? The cactus plant does well in the desert environment, but I hardly believe that there is enough liquid to grow enough plants like this to live off of.

Natural pest repellents and the like already exist. We don't need Monsanto to make a round-up ready plant for us. God knows what that modified material will do in your system, add to that the round-up.

Troy



posted on Nov, 5 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by cybertroy
 



The bottom line is, will the GMO crop nourish us, in other words, will our body accept it as good healthy food? And will the environment accept it, in other words will it decompose normally into usable compounds, and will it harm or help animals?

surely, No: to get maximal crop needs to apply very harmful methods against environment.



posted on Nov, 7 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stewie
Yes, great news!
All of the action it seems is coming out of Europe. Good for them!
Someday the fat Americans will wake up!
Thanks for the link!



Viva la France!

Monsanto owns us now.. 3M, ITT, GE, ..et. al.
We are plenty awake but here in America we'd get killed for doing anything like this.
And they would make it look like an accident.

We aren't just another 3rd world country.


We inadvertently perfected the
TOTAL CONTROL OF YOUR PEOPLE concept.


Some small cabal of illuminated men, a bit more clever,
devious and able to dupe the entire lot of honest, unsuspecting,
freedom loving, founding fathers and the system.

Like rats on a ship they came along....
Bought up consumables and energy commodities...US Corporations
Call them the heritage (inserting things here to avoid sensors) foundation.
A religious lot of pagans - e (again) street.

and now so many people serve as their puppets, their workers, their slaves.
We work longer hours, more days and take fewer vacations in America,
on fewer benefits and no free health care. But Corporate America is doing really great!

"It wasn't always a Frank Capra movie."
At least that's what people tell me.





edit on 7-11-2010 by rusethorcain because: conspiracies are killing me






top topics



 
90
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join