It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Monsanto - Bayer Engineering Death: Bees, Bats and You?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:21 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Is a big lie, people that live in countries with famine problems is due to displacement of populations due to wars.

Many of the so call farmers from poor countries like India farmers and Africa do not want GMO seeds.

The big lie that made posible the permits for GMO crops about been able to end hunger is showing its true ugly face.

It was never about feeding the people and the hungry but control of seed supplies for poor countries.

Report now shows that the GMO crops are not as good as regular crops when it comes to yields.

And now we have to deal with the by product of the ready seeds better and genetically enhanced weeds, that is forcing farmers to drop the ready seeds and go back to the more damaging pesticide to combat the weeds.

Failure to Yield
Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops

Farmers Cope With Roundup-Resistant Weeds

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:43 PM

Originally posted by unityemissions
I never mentioned organic, and was responding to a post in which you mentioned the need for GMO products.

By responding to my point about needing GM crops you are responding to my points about organic crops, we can argue this point or concentrate on the important parts, that is up to you.

Originally posted by unityemissions
There is no resource we don't already have in abundance to feed the world. Name just one. Arable land often comes up. I'm sure you already know that the hydroponic/aeroponics method takes care of that problem.

Actually arable land cannot support us and the biosphere in all areas, if it could then GM crops would never have been invented. Draught resistant crops were the big thing in the 80s/90s and they saved literally billions of lives. If we took such things away and used organics we would kill a load of people. If you're up for that then fine but i'm not.

Originally posted by unityemissions
You can't reasonably tell me that the nearly 7 billion minds on this planet can't come up with some innovative means to adequately feed each and every one of us. So what's truly holding humanity back? Legislation and finances. That's the reality of the situation. This is not about being incapable, it's about corporate profits. It's more cost effective to use all these agricultural methods which sicken humanity.

No i can't tell you that because the solutions already exist, aeroponic and hydroponic farming could feed the world in abundance, and reduce the use of pesticides, i have said this many times and i'm rather tired of repeating it. We seem to agree yet you pick a fight over nothing and it is that which holds the world back.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:50 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984

But we have been using artifical selection for well over 3000 years and have not yet run into problems. All genetic engineering does is to accelerate the process. Instead of breeding 200 generations we take a shortcut. That to me is perfectly acceptable but as i say i do take major issues when a company engineers a plant to produce a pesticide, simply because when we ingest that plant we ingest that pesticide.

Or a "Terminator Gene" That could theoretically cross species contaminate to other non food plants and or animals? Here is the issue. They are or have rather already cornered the market and have set the guidelines. With no or very little real independent research.

I don't disagree with you, the terminator gene is a disgusting piece of technology and i am not understating it when i call it a crime against humanity. The idea that you prevent a people from growing crops is so horribly shocking i can't understand why it isn't a crime.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:53 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

To me it's just another reason why I call everything they are up to into question.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:18 PM
hands down, Monsanto must be the most evil company the world has ever seen. They almost put God like status on themselves, and by controlling the food we consume they almost have it.

Think about it, once they finally control all the food which is what they want, they control the population of the world. Talk about an easy way for TPTB to reduce human population? just poison the damn food we eat and watch us kill ourselfs slowly. No need for a WW3 or anything like that, this is this most underhanded, sneeky way they could do it.

Maybe not in our life times, but not far of and they will own everything umans eat on this planet and will be able to do as they please

heres is what they say on the UK website

Monsanto is an agricultural company. We apply innovation and technology to help farmers around the world produce more while conserving more. We help farmers grow yield sustainably so they can be successful, produce healthier foods, better animal feeds and more fiber, while also reducing agriculture's impact on our environment.

edit on 9-12-2010 by thedarktower because: found their uk slogan

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:31 PM
reply to post by marg6043

The implications of what they are trying to do seems for some too big to achieve, but let lose some mutating seeds in nature in strategic areas of the world and then let nature take its course and seat back an watch what is going to happen in a few decades as the world goes hungry for lack of fertile seeds.

When I put on my tin foil hat I sometimes think that is just what TPTB wants. While you read this keep in mind that the USDA funded the research that produced spermicidal corn.

I have tripped over more than one site that advocates "culling" humanity. Killing off old folk or what ever.

You can even find this:

Earth population 'exceeds limits'
There are already too many people living on Planet Earth, according to one of most influential science advisors in the US government.

Nina Fedoroff told the BBC One Planet programme that humans had exceeded the Earth's "limits of sustainability".

Remember Corporations (and Banks) make money by GROWING. So why all of a sudden since around 1970 do they want to cut population growth DRASTICALLY? Also remember they lie through their teeth.

What I found very interesting was the timing of events around 1970. This is the time when we got OSHA and EPA and our Manufacturing base was starting to move to foreign countries. Remember TPTB has complete control of the media so "Environmentalism" could not have grown without their consent.

Here is the timing:
In 1970 you had "Who controls the food supply controls the people; who controls the energy can control whole continents; who controls money can control the world". – Henry Kissinger.

In 1972 you had Environmentalism and "Global Warming" promoted by TPTB in the First Earth Summit chaired by Maurice Strong.

And last but not least you had the CIA document dated 1974 predicting an Ice Age.

Now for the tinfoil. We next need to look at what happen BEFORE the items mentioned above.

First Gleissberg (1939 & 1971) identified an 88 yr cycle in the weather patterns
Gleissberg's work meant you could predict the next warming spell. What was interesting was that in 1972 the world was STILL in a cool phase and would not start warming for another couple of years! So how come Maurice Strong was already hyping "Global Warming" in 1972?

The second really interesting point was the Milankovitch Cycles that predict Ice Ages.

Milankovitch published “Astronomical Methods for Investigating Earth’s Historical Climate” in 1938. His work was of great interest especially during the 1963 International Geophysical Year.

George Kukla, together with Robert Matthews of Brown University, convened a conference in 1972 entitled “The Present Interglacial: How and When will it End?”, and reported it in Science magazine... [note the date]

Kukla and Matthews alerted President Richard Nixon, and as a result the US Administration set up a Panel on the Present Interglacial involving the State Department and other agencies. None of us knew then that the mid-century cooling was about to be punctuated by a warming spell from the late 1970s to the mid 1990s.... [again note the dates]

A more definitive confirmation of Milankovitch came in 1976, in a paper by Hays, Imbrie and Shackleton, using Shackleton’s data in the figure above. But long before either that paper or my own, there was widespread behind-the-scenes acceptance of Milankovitch, and Kukla, for one, was concerned about the implications.....

George Kukla: Well almost all of us have been pretty sure that there were only four ice ages, separated by relatively long warm intervals. But now we know that there were twenty in the last two million years. And the warm periods are much shorter than we believed originally. They are something around 10,000 years long. and I’m sorry to say that the one we are living in now has just passed its 10,000 year birthday. That of course means that the ice age is due now any time.

Hays, Imbrie and Shackleton

James D. Hays, Columbia University Ph.D. 1964, spent the late ‘60’s developing, in cooperation with Lamont colleagues, a chronostratigraphic framework for deep-sea sediments by connecting the land-dated record of Earth’s magnetic field reversals with marine stratigraphic datums

By 1970 Hays realized that this marine chronostratigraphy... could form the basis of a global study of Pleistocene climates. He asked John Imbrie to join the Lamont group and the CLIMAP project was born. Hays then asked Nick Shackelton to join CLIMAP and generate an oxygen isotope record of benthic and planktonic microfossils in a Pacific core.

It was this careful pre-CLIMAP and early CLIMAP chronostratigraphic work that allowed Hays, Imbrie and Shackelton to show, through analyses in both the frequency and time domains, that Earth’s orbital variations control the timing of climate change on ice age time scales, proving the theory that Milankovitch contributed so much to developing.

Hays, Imbrie and Shackleton's work was published in 1976.

Sami Solanki, Professor at the Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich Switzerland, says the Sun has been burning more brightly over the last 60 years than over the previous 1090 years.

Solar activity reaches new high - Dec 2, 2003

" Geophysicists in Finland and Germany have calculated that the Sun is more magnetically active now than it has been for over a 1000 years. Ilya Usoskin and colleagues at the University of Oulu and the Max-Planck Institute for Aeronomy say that their technique – which relies on a radioactive dating technique - is the first direct quantitative reconstruction of solar activity based on physical, rather than statistical, models (I G Usoskin et al. 2003 Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 211101)

Solar Cycle 24

...SDO is going to launch during the deepest solar minimum in almost 100 years....

...All stars are variable at some level, and the sun is no exception. We want to compare the sun's brightness now to its brightness during previous minima and ask: is the sun getting brighter or dimmer?"

The answer seems to be dimmer. Measurements by a variety of spacecraft indicate a 12-year lessening of the sun's "irradiance" by about 0.02% at visible wavelengths and 6% at EUV wavelengths. These results, which compare the solar minimum of 2008-09 to the previous minimum of 1996, are still very preliminary...

The big question is "Do TPTB believe an Ice Age is just around the corner and have they been preparing for it since the 1970's?" Does their actions during that time frame give us the answer?

Oh and for those who were not aware: Global Cooling was on the Bilderberg agenda this year

OK, Now I will take my tinfoil hat off my very suspicious head

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:39 PM
reply to post by thedarktower

hands down, Monsanto must be the most evil company the world has ever seen...

heres is what they say on the UK website

Monsanto is an agricultural company. We apply innovation and technology to help farmers around the world produce more while conserving more. We help farmers grow yield sustainably so they can be successful, produce healthier foods, better animal feeds and more fiber, while also reducing agriculture's impact on our environment.

GAG that made me lose my tea. What a complete and utter lie.

Sustainably!!! The only thing Monsanto sustains is the drain of cash from the farmers pocket!

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I don't disagree with you, the terminator gene is a disgusting piece of technology and i am not understating it when i call it a crime against humanity. The idea that you prevent a people from growing crops is so horribly shocking i can't understand why it isn't a crime.

What makes it even worse, is it was a USDA agent W.Koelz, who stole the original seeds containing the gene from India!

More Biopiracy:

And as I stated earlier we find the USDA behind the spermicidal corn too.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:22 PM
reply to post by crimvelvet

Thanks for the links, I am watching closely the global warming debate,I love history specially the history of the earth I have been following the reports that nobody wants to know about and are dismissed by the government.

The ones that are predicting a repeat of the last ice age 11 thousand years ago.

Earth is just going through a transition of warming before the ice age hit.

And this is been expected the cycle of the last ice age in between warming is coming to an end.

But let cash out on the global warming that nobody really knows how long its going to last before starting the ice age profiting era.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

But we have been using artifical selection for well over 3000 years and have not yet run into problems. All genetic engineering does is to accelerate the process.

No. Sorry, but you are wrong. They are not just accelerating the process. They are using an entirely different process. There is no chance whatsoever that selective breeding, which relies on the natural characteristics various plants exhibit, could accomplish the kinds of things they are doing with GM, a completely unnatural process in that the changes would never occur naturally in a million years.

As far as hydroponic science goes, all you are doing is producing designer plants, according to whatever colour, shape, taste or any other superficial quality, you might think of, but that does not mean it is a better and more nutritious product. We, as creatures who evolved over milennia in this world eating naturally occuring fruits, vegetables, and even a wide assortment of bacteria and yeasts actually need all that stuff. No scientist really knows all of the micro-nutrients and other factors that go into human health and no artificially created or manufactured product is going to be able to provide us with everything we need.

Man has used his brain well to accomplish a lot of things, but to imagine that he can actually make things better than mother nature is a silly and arrogant idea.
edit on 12/9/2010 by wayno because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by marg6043

Thanks for the links, I am watching closely the global warming debate,I love history specially the history of the earth I have been following the reports that nobody wants to know about and are dismissed by the government.

It is the timing that really gets to me. And the big switch in attitude. If you look at Nicole's article, those moves makes sense. Bankrupt farmers so they go to work in the factories.

But then all of a sudden in the 1970's we have a complete turn about.

It is as if a major decision was made very high up (Bilderberg?) to strip all the wealth from the USA (and Europe) and move it out of the country. Heck I know a guy who made a living packing up US factories, putting them aboard ships and sending them overseas.

The money motive just does not make all that much sense. The labor is not trained and there is always the possibility of the industry being "nationalized"

On the other hand if you believe an Ice Age may be on its way in a few generations then moving "civilization" towards the equator all of the sudden makes sense. The targets would be:
Mexico - CHECK
Brazil - CHECK
India - CHECK
CHINA - Maybe
and Africa - working on it.

The other very big concern would be population control. Again we saw the "population control" craze hit big in the 1970's although the Rockefeller's were pushing it from 1933 and Milancovitch did not publish until 1938.

The spermicidal corn is certainly of concern. I wonder if the properties remain after processing. Think of High Fructose Corn Syrup and Corn Oil for starters. Talk about a real easy way to do population control!

And of course we also have Agenda 21 and "sustainability" Ideas that make a lot of sense if you are looking at a coming Ice Age.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:14 PM

Ironfisted Monsanto looking to eliminate USDA beet ban

One of the goals of the ban’s ruling is to determine how the GMO crop impacts the life cycle of the non-GMO and organic crops. And as you can probably guess, Monsanto is used to getting what Monsanto wants.

Monsanto and their grower friends don’t want to wait for analysis of how their controversial GMO crops could be affecting the regular non GMO crops. Monsanto is trying to scare and or bully the USDA into accepting Monsanto’s judgment about the sugar market.

They want everyone to believe that things will collapse without Monsanto’s benevolent business sense. Let’s not kids ourselves about what’s going on here.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:27 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

A very good reason to quit using sugar. I wonder if they will spike it with the "sperimicidal" gene like they did corn....

Buy the way I love the cartoon.

For some reason people do not believe Scientists can be bribed. HAH It happens all the time. Either give the acceptable answers or start looking for another job. - been there done that and now I am blackballed.

"Team Playing" is a marketable skill Honesty is not.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:29 PM
Take a good look at the Bayer Company and you will find its ties to Nazi Germany, once evil always evil, somethings never die. IG Farben merged with Bayer.

The Bayer company knows all about the Bees and the part they played in there collapse. You won't get them to admit to anything.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:51 PM
reply to post by Katie

Yeah you want those guys and monsanto engineering the food on your table.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:57 PM

Originally posted by SLAYER69

........Thread update........

Judge orders Monsanto GMO sugar beets destroyed

A federal judge has ruled - for the first time in US history - that a genetically modified (GM) crop be destroyed.
This led an angry Judge White to order the controversial beets destroyed. Monsanto had a fit over the legal ban last month.

This update warmed my heart, Slay and gave me pause to think that maybe, just maybe there could be some chance out there that the side of reason will eventually prevail... that is, of course if there are more excellent people around like Judge Jeffery White here... what a fitting and proper thing to do! WoOt! Why, just have the (snip) destroyed!

Yea, verily, every once in a while something good happens amidst the sea of horror... this is one of them.

But we are so not out of the woods yet, as shown in the article you posted a link to in a later post, a snippet of which appears below...

Indeed it is scary, real scary, even in light of the above goodness, as we know Monsanto owns the government agencies we the people need to help us, eliminating that resource for the most part... maybe we will need to rely on Judge White and any like minded legal folk... or... perhaps ultimately... scorched fields...
Go judges!

Monsanto and their various groups of cronies are attempting to bypass the ruling and basically re-legalize the planting of their beets. The same ruling that came about because the USDA is worried about the potential unknown dangers of Monsanto’s engineered “food”.
People wonder why Monsanto is viewed as an evil dummy corporation full of maniacal super scientists. They act like they are above the law.

They petition government agencies like safety rules weren’t meant to apply to them. It’s like they are trying to prove a point that nobody can stop Monsanto from controlling and owning all of the world’s food supply.

We must not let them... Monsanto, Bayer and all the others... must be stopped!

edit on 12/9/2010 by PixelDuster because: sorry, classified

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 05:29 PM
reply to post by PixelDuster

We must not let them... Monsanto, Bayer and all the others... must be stopped!

Unfortunately we lost the war when that "Food Safety Farce" was passed click

Just like the Federal Reserve Act, once the basic law is passed amendments are slipped into other 2000 page bills modifying the law, until Monsanto and buddies will have outlawed all private food production.

Groups like Food &Water Watch and Organic Consumers Assoc. were formed by the Ag Cartel well ahead of time and were able to convince the sheeple that the bill was for their benefit.

This is typical

Stop the Hysteria! A Closer Look at HR 875

For the past few weeks the internet has been abuzz with conversations about HR 875, aka the “Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009.” [PDF] This Congressional bill is primarily aimed at creating a new Food Safety Agency and improving our food safety systems, but has been blasted by many food and farm-loving activists who warn that it is the spawn of Monsanto and it will make organic farming and backyard gardening illegal. Scary stuff – but is it true?

When I first started reading about HR 875 it quickly became clear that something was missing from all the criticisms: endorsement from a reputable environmental or food organization. Call me naïve, but I tend to look to well-established, science-based institutions to help me decide which issues I should get on board with...

There are more constructive things we food activists could be doing with our time than fighting against this relatively benign – and probably even beneficial – bill.....

"relatively benign – and probably even beneficial – bill..."

I wonder what planet, or perhaps, what CORPORATION she comes from. By the way the clue to her actual background is in the words "science-based institutions"

That comes direct from the WTO, the pawn of the Ag Cartels. Remember the Agreement on Agriculture was written by Cargill's VP Dan Amstutz.

Food safety systems.
Cargill is building food safety systems based on the standards and principles of Codex Alimentarius; animal health systems based on the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) principles; and plant health issues based on the International Plant Protection Commission (IPPC) principles for plant health issues. These systems are based on prevention, intervention and response to enhance public health outcomes. If used in a consistent, global fashion throughout the food industry and governments, they will help to create transparent, harmonized, science-based, global food safety systems...

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 06:02 PM
reply to post by crimvelvet

"Science Base" it depends who got pay for the right reports.
and who the reliable science sources are working for.

Nothing more dangerous than a NWO corporate whore telling people what is good or not for them.

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 06:11 PM
Nice work on a topic of major importance.

A few months ago there was an ats thread which pointed out that the termites who comprise our government did make outlaws of anyone selling food with labels specifying that no GMO's were used.

Speaks volumes. I guess they have the representatives by the balls, either that, or they are just evil men who gnaw away at our lifeblood for lobbyist payoffs, and then vote themselves raises each year, even in the teeth of a planned depression, for doing so. As such, they are able to convince themselves that they did a good thing by poisoning us. How could anyone be loyal to this...travesty of state-ism? Heads is tails....

Here's what I can add from a lifetime of ignoring food and their human values:

Nearly all soy is bad, period. Most of it is GMO. The % was high, around 80+ per cent of soy is modified genetically. They need the oil from it, and the waste, or curd, is packaged off as food. A successful ploy that stuck for decades. Contains phytoestrogens, which addles hormones in humans. Nice.

Wheat and gluten (the stuff that makes anything doughy like a pizza crust) is probably an age accelerator, adding life draining inflammation to your flesh. It comes on regular like, so you think it's simply an age process. How could wheat be anything but good for you? There are reports of people who could barely walk at a young adult age, from inflammatory joints, who were pain free and functioning like a healthy adult after a 6 week abstinence from gluten. Gluten is made up of a wide ranging variety of polymers. One blogger reported that monsanto is not actively involved with wheat-hard to believe hard to believe.

I'm trying to avoid glutens, just for kicks, because there are many sources saying that today's wheat is altered and largely indigestible. I really don't know.

One thing's for sure...they are aiming for the belly now.

edit on 9-12-2010 by starless and bible black because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 06:59 PM

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in