Never mind GMO's.

[ananda]

GMO's promote biodiversity since they can put the same genes in many varieties. Also, many GMO's are included in hybrids like those used for corn. It isn't like potatoes where every generation is a clone of the previous.

"Same genes" is the polar opposite of biodiversity. One vector of attack against those genes ... the whole system is wiped.

 

[Loudmouth]

"Same genes" is the polar opposite of biodiversity. One vector of attack against those genes ... the whole system is wiped.

Those genes amount to a handful among tens of thousands. There is no "vector of attack" against the gene that produces Roundup resistance. Parasites and viruses that attack these plants attack way more than just a single gene.

 

[ananda]

Those genes amount to a handful among tens of thousands. There is no "vector of attack" against the gene that produces Roundup resistance. Parasites and viruses that attack these plants attack way more than just a single gene.

Then why focus on a single gene (or few genes) in GMO engineering, if that single gene wasn't more important than other genes? Resistance against those GMO crops is a resistance against the single gene, which is a vector of attack from nature.

 

[Loudmouth]

Then why focus on a single gene (or few genes) in GMO engineering, if that single gene wasn't more important than other genes?

That single gene is more important for not getting killed by Roundup. If you want to make the claim that the gene for Roundup resistance makes it more susceptible to plant diseases, then I would want to see the references that back that up.

Resistance against those GMO crops is a resistance against the single gene, which is a vector of attack from nature.

Nature doesn't make Roundup.

 

[ananda]

That single gene is more important for not getting killed by Roundup. If you want to make the claim that the gene for Roundup resistance makes it more susceptible to plant diseases, then I would want to see the references that back that up.

No, I'm not making that claim.

Nature doesn't make Roundup.

Exactly.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, I'm not making that claim.

Yeah, you did.

""Same genes" is the polar opposite of biodiversity. One vector of attack against those genes ... the whole system is wiped."

Exactly

.

It is the exact opposite of what you claimed.

"Resistance against those GMO crops is a resistance against the single gene, which is a vector of attack from nature."

Roundup doesn't come from nature.

 

[ananda]

Yeah, you did.

""Same genes" is the polar opposite of biodiversity. One vector of attack against those genes ... the whole system is wiped."

It is the exact opposite of what you claimed.

"Resistance against those GMO crops is a resistance against the single gene, which is a vector of attack from nature."

Roundup doesn't come from nature.

No, I am talking about this (for example): "GM crops in Britain had shown a worrying decline in farmland biodiversity, where numbers of bees and butterflies were found to be 68pc lower in GM fields."

 

[Loudmouth]

No, I am talking about this (for example): "GM crops in Britain had shown a worrying decline in farmland biodiversity, where numbers of bees and butterflies were found to be 68pc lower in GM fields."

Are those GMO bees and butterflies?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

See above.

It's the "runaway train" syndrome. Cultural change often lags way behind technological advances.

Also many third world lifestyles require large families to perform labor-intensive tasks, regardless of the risks from starvation and disease. Modern medicine has allowed populations in those area to expand way beyond the capacity of the land to support them, and thus increases the potential for greater disasters in the future.

 

[Lavendar Frog]

Without regard to the controversy surrounding GMO's should we be plowing up more land for annual crops at all? In view of global warming we should be returning acreage to permanent pasture, grassland, hay land, and forests wherever possible. Why encourage runaway population growth by means of overproducing foods when the annual cultivation of land contributes so heavily to global warming.

Global atmospheric , climate, changes have occurred on earth since before our species walked the surface.
I think a relevant concern instead is the loss of farm land to development. Housing communities, expansionism of interstate and other arteries of travel, at the cost of farm land. Either through developers purchase or invocation of Eminent Domain.
No Farms No Food.

If America ever arrives at the point where we have to import food due to being unable to sustain the hundreds of millions that populate this country, we're a goner. If we think OPEC and oil rich nations have us literally over a barrel now, when they don't have to because of our own capacity to drill, imagine when other countries have to concede to survive us with food exports.

We're seeing domestic wheat farms diminished now because of the financial draw afforded by the Ethanol market.
A corn market that plants what is usually called , cow corn or pig corn, because it isn't typically used for human food markets.

Imagine, if we have to import the supply to meet the demand of food supplies in America. Because our open farm country is now replaced by townhouses, HA governed housing developments, and highways.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Global atmospheric , climate, changes have occurred on earth since before our species walked the surface.
I think a relevant concern instead is the loss of farm land to development. Housing communities, expansionism of interstate and other arteries of travel, at the cost of farm land. Either through developers purchase or invocation of Eminent Domain.
No Farms No Food.

If America ever arrives at the point where we have to import food due to being unable to sustain the hundreds of millions that populate this country, we're a goner. If we think OPEC and oil rich nations have us literally over a barrel now, when they don't have to because of our own capacity to drill, imagine when other countries have to concede to survive us with food exports.

We're seeing domestic wheat farms diminished now because of the financial draw afforded by the Ethanol market.
A corn market that plants what is usually called , cow corn or pig corn, because it isn't typically used for human food markets.

Imagine, if we have to import the supply to meet the demand of food supplies in America. Because our open farm country is now replaced by townhouses, HA governed housing developments, and highways.

I wouldn't worry too much about that. If we've learned anything it is the incredible flexibility of our agricultural system. In one season farmers can switch crops to the more profitable ones. If food grains become more in demand than grain for fuel American farmers will respond very quickly. The market drives change relentlessly.

Also, millions of acres of farmland goes into, and out of, the CRP (Conservation Reserve Program) each year. This also adds to the flexibility of our ag system.

 

[Lavendar Frog]

I wouldn't worry too much about that. If we've learned anything it is the incredible flexibility of our agricultural system. In one season farmers can switch crops to the more profitable ones. If food grains become more in demand than grain for fuel American farmers will respond very quickly. The market drives change relentlessly.

Yes that is true, and thank you for interjecting that comfort into what can be a scary thought for many in matters of sustaining the crop yield in America.
My concerns however are with regard to the loss of farm land to mass development. Thus, the eradication of farm land.

 

[Michael]

I wouldn't worry too much about that. If we've learned anything it is the incredible flexibility of our agricultural system. In one season farmers can switch crops to the more profitable ones. If food grains become more in demand than grain for fuel American farmers will respond very quickly. The market drives change relentlessly.

Agreed. I think I'm most annoyed at the fact that GMO proponents claim that GMO crops produce superior crop yields, when it fact there's no actual evidence to support that claim. I also believe that all foods should be labelled as GMO, or non GMO so that Americans can choose which foods they want, and decide for themselves if they wish to play the role of the guinipig generation.

 

[ananda]

Agreed. I think I'm most annoyed at the fact that GMO proponents claim that GMO crops produce superior crop yields, when it fact there's no actual evidence to support that claim. I also believe that all foods should be labelled as GMO, or non GMO so that Americans can choose which foods they want, and decide for themselves if they wish to play the role of the guinipig generation.

As we all know, GMO proponents are viciously preventing labeling of products containing GMO - they prefer the cover of darkness.

On the other hand, the one thing GMO proponents cannot control is the proliferation of manufacturers who voluntarily label their items as non-GMO.

Anything not labeled non-GMO is likely GMO, so, it's labeling by default

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yes that is true, and thank you for interjecting that comfort into what can be a scary thought for many in matters of sustaining the crop yield in America.
My concerns however are with regard to the loss of farm land to mass development. Thus, the eradication of farm land.

No worries. We have millions of acres of cultivatable land lying fallow (CRP, Conservation Reserve Program, formerly called the "Soil Bank").

 

[Lavendar Frog]

No worries. We have millions of acres of cultivatable land lying fallow (CRP, Conservation Reserve Program, formerly called the "Soil Bank").

I have not heard of a Soil Bank. I'll look that up. That is very good to know. Thank you.

 

[Loudmouth]

As we all know, GMO proponents are viciously preventing labeling of products containing GMO - they prefer the cover of darkness.

Why do they need to be labeled to begin with?

 

[ananda]

Why do they need to be labeled to begin with?

Because not everyone agrees with eating parts of human in the guise of rice. Because many of us believe in various spiritual implications of such choices. Because not everyone believes that GMO gene splicing is innocuous & not everyone shares the same goals in life as you do, and we want notice and informed consent.

 

[Loudmouth]

Because not everyone agrees with eating parts of human in the guise of rice.

There are no human parts in rice.

Because many of us believe in various spiritual implications of such choices. Because not everyone believes that GMO gene splicing is innocuous & not everyone shares the same goals in life as you do.

Is there anything based on evidence?

 

[ananda]

There are no human parts in rice.

Yes there are, and I do not care to be a cannibal.

Is there anything based on evidence?

Of course; do you recognize that some things that serve as evidence to you may or may not be evidence to me, and vice versa?