Scientists Slam GMO-Pushing Nobel Laureates In Damning Letter

In late June 2016, over 100 Nobel laureates signed a letter attacking the environmental organization Green Peace and calling on the group to end their opposition to GMOs.

Source

The letter asks Greenpeace to cease their efforts to block a genetically engineered strain of rice designed to aid the war against poverty. Little does the population know, Greenpeace isn't the problem. Reliant systems not developing as fast as the agenda they're the foundation of is.

“We urge Greenpeace and its supporters to reexamine the experience of farmers and consumers worldwide with crops and foods improved through biotechnology, recognize the findings of authoritative scientific bodies and regulatory agencies, and abandon their campaign against ‘GMOs’ in general and golden rice in particular.”

Golden Rice

The attack on Greenpeace was spearheaded by Pichard Roberts, chief scientific officer of New England Biolabs and Phillip Sharp, 1993 Nobel Prize winner in Physiology and Medicine.

Roberts said to the Washington Post,

We’re scientists. We understand the logic of science. It’s easy to see what Greenpeace is doing is damaging and anti-science. Greenpeace initially, and then some of their allies, deliberately went out of their way to scare people. It was a way for them to raise money for their cause.

Sounds like a script to me. The right to question the narrative, especially from entities that have been caught lying in the past should garner enough reason to halt certain progress. Big business will try and convince you to buy into a specific lifestyle in order to secure a predictable and profitable future.

From the project’s own website,


The Fathers of Golden Rice: from left to right, Adrian Dubock, Ingo Potrykus (Professor emeritus ETH Zurich), Peter Beyer (Univ of Freiburg), and Gary Toenniessen (Rockefeller Foundation) in front of the first Golden Rice field trial in Louisiana, September 2004.

The "Humanitarian" Board:

Prof Ingo Potrykus (co-inventor of Golden Rice), emeritus professor, ETH Zurich, Chairman of the Humanitarian Board(public relations and information)

Prof Peter Beyer (co-inventor) Univ of Freiburg (the science of biofortification)

Dr Gurdev Khush, retired rice breeder from IRRI (bred some of the most successful rice varieties for Asia)

Dr Gary Toenniessen, The Rockefeller Foundation (food security in developing countries)

Dr Adrian Dubock, Golden Rice Project Manager, Agricultural Consultancy for Development GmbH, Switzerland (private sector approaches to project management)

Dr Howarth Bouis, Director of HarvestPlus, International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), Cali-Colombia, and International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Washington DC (biofortification)

Dr Robert Bertram, USAID Washington DC (development in Third World agriculture)

Prof Matin Qaim, Professor and Chair in "International Food Economics and Rural Development" at the University of Göttingen, Germany (socioeconomic aspects)

Prof Robert Russell, Former Director and Senior Scientist, Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University Boston (vitamin A malnutrition)

Dr Robert Zeigler, Director General, IRRI

Dr Sunkeswari R Rao Dept of Biotechnology, India (national cooperation in rice research)

Prof Jean Pierre Jeannet, Babson College, Massachussets (global marketing)

The point of the list above is to allow you to do your own research.


Above: First joint meeting of the Golden Rice Humanitarian Board and the Golden Rice Network, IRRI, The Philippines, Nov 2005.

The main goal is to get as much of the “technology” into the hands of as many small farmers as possible in various poor and overpopulation areas of the world. The increase in Vitamin a would help reduce blindness and death from the proclaimed deficiency epidemic.

“But sir, this is a conspiracy website. Where’s the beef?”

I’m glad you asked. Sit back, relax and enjoy the exposé. Let’s take a closer look at this “golden rice” and who is behind the seemingly forced GMO movement.

The Golden Rice Project was the result of an initiative by the Rockefeller Foundation, and is based on a widely recognised need for a sustainable biofortification approach to contribute to alleviating the scourge of micronutrient deficiencies worldwide.

First, a primer.

More specifically, the Rockefeller family.

"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." - David Rockefeller, Memoirs, page 405

The Rockefeller Foundation's International Program on Rice Biotechnology

Just remember, globalist agendas can never exist in true form. If we do not comply, they will develop a “problem, reaction, solution” scenario, where the proprietary tools available to help curb (not cure), the targeted issue, exist in the hands of the few. You must realize that it happens slow enough to go unnoticed and in ways you do not understand.

“The Rockefeller Foundation has a long, complex, and rich history in promoting agricultural development throughout the developing world. The Foundation began its major field-based program in Mexico in the 1940s, which led to the series of technologies, insights, and processes collectively known as the ‘Green Revolution’. (…) Through a series of strategically placed grants, some of the world’s premier laboratories were invited to participate in the program.”

PDF: Link

From the foundation,

“The Foundation conducts international projects for the improvement of the world’s four most important foods – corn, wheat, potatoes, and rice.”

More globalist doublespeak from Rockefeller’s cronies,

Nina Federoff, who served as the scientific advisor to Hillary Clinton during her time as US secretary stated:

“A new Green Revolution demands a global commitment to creating a modern agricultural infrastructure everywhere.”

More on Hillary’s ties to the globalist,

The NWO: Two Sides of the Same Coin

To help you realize that there’s an agenda to discredit those who question the merit of GMO studies, take a look at the link below. With enough opposition towards obvious globalist agendas, the truth has a tendency to expose itself if you know where to look.

GMO activists not to blame for scientific challenges slowing introduction, study finds

Heralded on the cover of Time magazine in 2000 as a genetically modified (GMO) crop with the potential to save millions of lives in the Third World, Golden Rice is still years away from field introduction and even then, may fall short of lofty health benefits still cited regularly by GMO advocates, suggests a new study from Washington University in St. Louis.

Just look at the propaganda!


Anti-GMO groups are calling Golden Rice the Trojan horse of biotechnology corporations, claiming the lack of oversight and regulation will help pave the way for the global approval other more profitable crops. Of course once you pay the piper, those that signed on the dotted line will be left with scraps and a potentially less blind population.

In a recent article in the journal Agriculture & Human Values, Stone and co-author Dominic Glover, a rice researcher at the Institute for Development Studies at the University of Sussex, find little evidence that anti-GMO activists are to blame for Golden Rice’s unfulfilled promises.

More propaganda!

“The rice simply has not been successful in test plots of the rice breeding institutes in the Philippines, where the leading research is being done,” Stone said. “It has not even been submitted for approval to the regulatory agency, the Philippine Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI).”

One researcher stated:

The simple fact is that after 24 years of research and breeding, Golden Rice is still years away from being ready for release.”

At this point, scientists are still unsure if the beta carotene in Golden Rice will even be converted into Vitamin A in the bodies of badly undernourished children. There is little research to show how the rice will hold up when stored for long periods of time or what happens when cooked using traditional methods used in remote locations. After 24 years of R&D, this came somewhat of a surprise to me, but more than enough reason to slow the momentum of widespread GMO operations.

The Basics of the Licensing Agreement between Syngenta and the inventors of Golden Rice

Industries are in the business of develop and selling products. Thus, an industrial partner was sought that would agree to the humanitarian use of a product derived from the invention, apart from a commercial use. Such a partner was found with Syngenta, an agrichemicals and seeds company with headquarters in Switzerland.

Syngenta was instrumental in converting the proof-of-concept results generated at the University of Freiburg and ETH Zurich into deliverable products. The collaboration was based on the understanding that Syngenta would retain commercial exclusivity for the technology, including large agricultural setups in developing countries while allowing its humanitarian use free of charge.

Again, this is about business and being the first to create a profitable global market initiative, with widely dispersed micro-economies controlled by a monopolized global industry.

In 2005 Syngenta decided not to go commercial with Golden Rice in developed countries, a main reason being that there is practically no vitamin A deficiency in such countries. and thus very little commercial interest, even though antioxidants are very fashionable, and provitamin A is such an antioxidant.

While the GMO industry fail to acknowledge their own shortcomings, they have no problem sidestepping the gaping hole in the floor in order to promote or pimp their seed “technology.”

They have no problem pointing the finger towards the activists, who they label as “murderers” because they keep life saving rice from entering the mouths of poor, blind children. Sounds bad, I know.

I even have to drag Obama into this because I never understood why he became the recipient of a Nobel Peace Prize. It now dawns on me that not only do they award genuine innovations, but people in other sociopolitical positions determined to implement global initiatives under the guise of humanitarianism.

Oh, by the way,

Nobel panel saw Obama peace prize as ‘mistake,’ new book claims

The former director of Norway’s Nobel Institute revealed this week that he regrets the committee’s decision to give the 2009 Nobel Peace award to President Obama.

Geil Lundestad, director at the institute for 25 years, said in his just-published memoir that he and the committee had unanimously decided to grant the award to Mr. Obama just after his election in 2009 more in hopes of aiding the American president to achieve his goals on nuclear disarmament, rather than in recognition of what Mr. Obama had already accomplished.

Looking back over Mr. Obama’s presidency, Mr. Lundestad said, granting him the award did not fulfill the committee’s expectations.

“[We] thought it would strengthen Obama and it didn’t have this effect,” he told the Associated Press in an interview.

I thought I should add that for sh!ts and giggles, lol. Sorry Obama, trying to remove the human element from killing innocent civilians hasn’t worked out to well.

Getting back to the beginning, there has been more than one opponent against the onslaught of GMO implementation. The Union of Latin American Scientists Committed to Society and Nature (UCCSN-AL), released their own letter denouncing the position supported by the Nobel laureates.

Latin American scientists reject Nobel laureates’ letter supporting GM crops

“[Transgenesis] cannot be considered an advanced science anymore because it is based on fallacious and anachronistic assumptions. Its defenders have oversimplified the scientific rationale behind GMOs to the point that the technology cannot be considered valid anymore: they have discarded rigorous science.

The lack of scientific ground that justifies GMOs is also the reason why its promoters deny complex systems of knowledge, such as indigenous peoples’ cultures and livelihoods. Transgenic technology is the geopolitical instrument for colonial domination of our time.”

The group says it is not entirely convinced that GM crops are needed to feed the growing population. No matter how big or small you label them, I have to admit, they make a good point.

“The four GM crops that are marketed massively are mainly intended for the production of biofuels and animal feed for poultry, pork and beef cattle industries: activities that consume more than 65% of the GM corn and soybean produced in the few countries that grow them, a very inefficient system —from an energy point of view —of agricultural production.

Around these crops there is an oligopoly of transnational corporations that control the production of seeds and grains; the storage, transportation and marketing of genetically modified commodities; and the mass production of animals, which are increasingly concentrated in fewer hands. In this regard, it is clear that this model does not contribute to the goal of feeding the world, but instead competes with and overpowers traditional food production…

And my most favorite part of their synopsis, this bold faced conspiracy based truth…

“The problem of lack of food is not caused by low production, but by the way the world food system is designed. It has undermined the traditional systems of food production, and therefore nutrition and food sovereignty of peoples.”

...and the beat goes on...

GM Crops Do Not Produce Higher Yields

“We question the promises made by GMOs proponents that these crops would have higher yields. Each of the countries in the Southern Cone where GM soybean is grown has different performance. The highest yields are registered in Brazil and Argentina, where the national agricultural research centres have dedicated many years to conventional breeding of this crop. On the other hand, in Ecuador—, a GM free country, —soybean yields are higher than in Bolivia and Paraguay.

“Another example is canola or rapeseed. In Canada (where they mainly use GM seeds), yield averages between 1986 and 2010 were 1,459 kg/ha, whereas in Western Europe, where conventional seeds are used, the average yield in the same period was 3,188 kg/ha.”

These “murderers” have even more concerns over the promotion of Golden Rice as the solution to world hunger. An information war has been declared and this is where you need to seperate the money driven tactics from sound science and reporting. Again, these guys make a GREAT point.

“The nutritional problems of a population are not related with the lack of a specific nutrient (in this case… pro-vitamin A), but with the general conditions of poverty and the loss of food sovereignty that has forced thousands of farmers communities to leave their lands or to be subordinated to agribusiness, whose only priority is to meet their voracious need to increase profits through monoculture, agroindustry and agro-export by occupying lands that used to be devoted to safe and nutritious food production. To believe that malnutrition problems will be overcome through bio-fortified genetically modified food is to ignore this reality.

“In order to meet the golden rice demand, millions of hectares will need to be planted in tropical and subtropical areas, and will need to expand over territories that today are use to grow food sovereignty crops, which will face the typical problems associated with large-scale monoculture. In addition, hundreds of plant species rich in pro-vitamin A, known, gathered or cultivated for a long time by local communities in the entire world will be affected. Each community can and must choose, in a sovereign way, what to eat, according to their cultural preferences and traditions, and how to meet their nutritional needs.

Who will benefit the most? Large agricultural business. The people are secretly being enslaved by corporate interests and shareholders, while the lack in government regulation in developing countries fuels their growth.

As with other GM crops, golden rice will also be controlled by large agribusiness companies. The “nutritional scheme” based in golden rice will involve the control of agribusiness over the whole value chain: from seed to distribution. Given the fact that it is a global trend to forbid farmers to save their seeds, even if golden rice will be patent-free, the seed will be corporately controlled. What would happen then with traditional rice producers and with the thousands of peasant traditional varieties of rice that they hold?

“Regarding trade, in many countries, rice producers do not have any influence in price fixation. Nationally, the price is set by local powerful groups that control both processing and distribution of rice. Internationally, the price is set at the Bangkok and Chicago Stock Exchange. The international trade of golden rice would be controlled by the same economic groups that control other GM commodities. Accordingly, golden rice will not generate food sovereignty and, on the contrary, it will increase dependence for both producers and consumers.

Alright, I'm done. My life needs tending now. I hope everyone who took the time to read or scan through my thread gets an idea of how the system works. There are multiple points that are briefly discussed and worth looking into. I’ll try and answer any questions that I can.

Thank you for reading.

a reply to: eisegesis


Enjoyed the read!


Well done!

crops and foods improved through biotechnology...

Because what's helped us survive for millennia just isn't good enough.


Sick bastards.

a reply to: eisegesis


Greetings-

I enjoyed Your contribution and to fulfill the quid pro quo of an intraweb chat forum, I leave this for You; "The Monsanto Years"

The song: www.youtube.com...

And this is the message behind the album:

www.youtube.com...

Stay Hydrated...

namaste

Currently, the greatest threat to the world food supply is GMOs.

If these people are so into helping third world nations, they could produce this great manna replacement ... and give it to these poor people as a gift.

Normally, a gift like this would be the sort of gift that just keeps on giving. A once only gift of a few tonnes of seeds would enable farmers to grow this super crop for ever. What a great gift!

Wait ... what ... they have to buy the seeds every year because someone snuck in another unnecessary modification that makes the seeds sterile. What a way to make money hey!

Of course ... from then on ... you have to do everything that Uncle Sammy tells you to or ... your people will starve to death.

No thanks ... they can pee off!

P

originally posted by: Hazardous1408

crops and foods improved through biotechnology...

Because what's helped us survive for millennia just isn't good enough.

Gluttony equals profit.

The last time I checked, there is an obesity epidemic in my country, hence the inability to market robo-rice in the US. Anyway, survival has been far removed from the equation of daily life for many people and the only ones I don't hear complaining are the corporations that cater to the fat heads complaining about their unmoderated behavior. After everyone started to get sick, the drug and insurance industry stepped in and took the meaning of survival to a completely new level. If one survives naturally, they can be cured naturally. Many people live unnaturally in my opinion.

Countries that this is marketed to face deeper rooted issues such as rape and the use of sex in an act of desperation to feel desire and purpose, both rapidly increasing the immediate population of any given habitat. Counterproductive to the globalist agenda, killing the root cause of certain issues would remove the environment for someone to "loan" them a better existence at the expense of their full and true potential. I thankfully realized early that it's better to suffer at times as long as you make gradual attempts to improve the situation.

More and more countries are refusing GMO products and it would seem that a lot of other country populations want nothing to do with them but ,Money can buy a lot of lawyers and politicians and scientist to do their bidding .Heck they don't want to let us know what is GMO and is not . If half of the benefits were true then the public would be ok with that but seeing they are not willing to put their labels where we put our money then any anti-GMO publicity is a good reason to keep building the protest against them .

I am not a big Green Peace fan as I think they have some issues too and receive money from some of the companies they don't go all out on .But some of their stuff I am ok with . Thanks for the work you put into this thread OP S&F