GMO Corn No Longer Resistant to Pests
 

From Scientific American.

In Brazil, with jungle all around the bugs are heavy. I guess that's why Brazilian farmers turned to GMO corn to save the day. But it didn't work. :facepalm:
Not the first failure.
Guess we'll need a stronger Frankincorn. :dead3:

You might find this interesting, Bruce: http://m.motherjones.com/environment...e-tyson-on-gmo

I have no doubt that playing God with food has brought some trouble, and I do try to go organic. But GMOs have never really troubled me. Big Ag DOES trouble me, tho.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well there used to be wild cows and he's completely wrong about apples... red delicious apples suck.
But what he describes is taking the best from nature and courting those traits.
I don't put that in the same league as making grain which will poison some species but won't affect people. Says who? For how long? How do they know that? And this isn't an item I can go to the market and choose modified or not. Grain is added to a large portion of everything we consume. Granted a lot of them are snacks we'd be better off not consuming at all, but still.:blush:

Plus I find the strong arm tactics of Monsanto/Cargill et al against farmers to be distasteful.

Well yeah...MoJo noted that he was speaking more from natural science than artificial means.

I've been reading too many books and watching too many DVDs during my summer vacation about Big Ag and Big Water...it all pisses me off. Who is really profiting in the end from all this? Shareholders, though they'll get sick in the end like the rest of us.

GMO Corn No Longer Resistant to Pests
 

Edit: damn phone. Grumble.

Natural selection and GMO are NOT the same thing ... holy crap, does anyone actually give this guy cred? Do people believe this shill for Big Ag?

Let's be clear. If you're eating corn on the cob this summer that tastes sweet and sugary, no matter how good it tastes: it's GMO. Not because of the sugar (directly); that was hybridization to gain market share. The GMO part came in because the sweet taste meant $$$, so bugs need not apply for part of the crop. GMO meant that bugs would not take any of the crop, thus making $$$$ for the seed-makers.

Note that I said seed-makers, not growers. The farmers still get fucked over by Monsanto, no matter what they do.They can't save seeds. Once they sign up with Monsanto, they are dependent on Monsanto, whether in the US, Africa, or anywhere else we know of.

This is about Monsanto and their determination to control the food supply for the planet. Trouble is, should they succeed, they'll immediately fail, because they are not as smart as they think they are.

What does this mean for the rest of us? The lowly peons who just want to live out our three-score-and-ten? It means gardens, folks. This season, now. And heirloom varieties that aren't tainted; and saving seeds, and replanting, and communicating with each other to trade varieties.

Look around on the 'net and you'll find lots of resources.

There is no indication that Tyson is a "shill" for Big Ag. Several scientists have expressed either support or neutrality on GMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

'Several scientists have expressed either support or neutrality on GMO' means that Tyson isn't shlling for Big Ag?

Sorry, but no. Tyson, in that video, is a shill for Big Ag. 'Several scientists', chosen by Big Ag, don't alter the truth of the matter.

And, seriously, elSi? Leaving aside the big companies/$$$$ and their pathetic fronts, do you really, truly believe this?

What is your educational background?

I'm about ready to just say FUCKYOUVERYMUCH to the wannabe intellects here.

FUCKYOUALLVERYVERYMUCH.

His expertize is astrophysics. Being in the spotlight as one of the public faces championing science, he's constantly barraged with challenging positions about anything science related. This comes from reporters, children, and all sorts hoping he'll slip up. I assume his default position is defend science.

I don't think he's a shill for anyone, except maybe science, but no corporate interests. However, I don't agree with him on this issue and think he may be in the default position, because he didn't address this issue, really, he tried to draw parallels I don't think are valid.

GMO Corn No Longer Resistant to Pests
 

Ortho, you can say "Fuck you very much" if you please. You are certainly entitled to your beliefs, and you seem like you have knowledge on this subject. However, you are coming across as if your thoughts on the matter are paramount, and that those disagreeing are foolish.

I have degrees in psychology and management, and was...*thinks*...2 or 3 classes shy of a biology minor. I am a skeptic...when I see stories that trumpet the latest claims of research, I immediately think about who funded the study, independent variables, statistical significance, etc.

I am also conscious of what I put into my body. I'm not a food purist, but more conscious than most folks.

When I look at the research on GMO, it appears to be generally supportive...and not just by scientists on the dole for Monsanto. Do I worry about GMO stuff? Absolutely...and we are seeing some issues as brought up by Bruce. But I also believe in science.

If you would like a genuine discussion on this, that would be swell. Otherwise, fuck YOU very much.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I brought up Tyson because that story was published earlier today by MoJo, and it worked into our discussion here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you both need a cupcake. There may be gmo wheat flour though. ;)

Any time, Ali!

The first thing a principle does is kill somebody; the second thing is, it tastes delicious.

:drool:

Apparently they are delicious. :)

Actually, I'd enjoy a genuine discussion on the topic; but first, I owe you an apology, elSicomoro. I was out of line in my last post to you. I hope we can discuss things cordially in future. No more demands re education and no more 'fuck you very much'.

Sometimes it's hard to remember a fact/truth is often temporary, the best you can do is stay informed of the latest consensus by the experts.
That's especially hard for students barraged with information/facts which their immediate future depends on knowing.
Something's true only until someone demonstrates it's not, rather something else is true.
Of course other people have to confirm it, but truths fall by the wayside all the time.

I'd say that knowledge falls by the wayside, not truth. A few decades ago, a grad student told me (when I was frustrated) that science ALWAYS works, because it can't do otherwise. If our experiment doesn't 'work', look at all the details, because the universe always does what's 'true' or right. We just weren't looking at the right thing. Or we weren't asking the right question. But what happens is always right, even if we don't understand it.

Yes, mother nature always gets it right, but few people are observers of science experiments beyond a rising cake or overloaded boat sinking, so you're talking semantics. Truth and fact are interchangeable for most people, they are even used to define each other..

truth
noun \ˈtrüth\
the truth : the real facts about something : the things that are true
: the quality or state of being true
: a statement or idea that is true or accepted as true

1 a archaic : fidelity, constancy
b : sincerity in action, character, and utterance
2 a (1) : the state of being the case : fact
(2) : the body of real things, events, and facts : actuality
(3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality
b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true <truths of thermodynamics>
c : the body of true statements and propositions
3a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality
b chiefly British : true 2
c : fidelity to an original or to a standard
4 capitalized Christian Science : god
— in truth : in accordance with fact : actually
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

fact
noun \ˈfakt\
: something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence
: a true piece of information

Full Definition of FACT
1:a thing done: as
a obsolete : feat
b : crime <accessory after the fact>
c archaic : action
2 archaic : performance, doing
3: the quality of being actual : actuality <a question of fact hinges on evidence>
4 a : something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact>
b : an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality — in fact
: in truth

All good :3eye: