You are missing the point that nature doesn't follow human made law. Once the GMOs are out and cross pollinating with native varieties that's it, there's no going back. I'm starting to repeat myself. Even right now, I wonder how many people are growing seeds with GM genes, without knowing, due to involuntary cross pollination. This clearly shows how ridiculous the idea of co-existence of GM crops with traditional ones, as pushed forward by GM proponents, truly is. Exactly. And the authoritarian mentality of the bio-tech industry is spending millions to ensure it stays that way. Lack of choice is the definition of totalitarianism. This just reinforces my previous statement. You're starting to contradict yourself just like the industry you're supporting. You said before that people are not stupid and you're now calling people who don't follow your way of thinking "stupid crazes". This says more about you than about the people you're judging. Another contradiction. Can you please explain how can you have more information without labelling? I never called farmers stupid. I'm sure they make the best economic choice with the least possible effort for themselves. However, just because something is economically advantageous it doesn't mean that it's the best course of action and definitely does not mean that it's environmentally sound. That's not true. Modern agriculture is known to erode and deplete arable soils of nutrition. Chemical fertilizers add 3 chemicals to the soil, while plants require several dozens. It's obvious this is unsustainable. If you mean military science, then I'd wholly agree. War zone is the most accurate metaphor to describe mono-cultures where everything else is killed but the crop for human consumption. What does my background matter for? Are you looking for reasons to personally attack me because you're running out of arguments? I have spoken to plenty of farmers, my parents were farmers. I grew up in a small self-subsistence farm until I moved on to study IT. I have since volunteered at a number of farms and I now have a small garden where I grow my own food organically. How about you? Do you know what it takes to grow a carrot without pesticide,herbicide,fungicide and chemical fertilizer? I'm sorry but recurring to facetiousness shows you ran out of arguments and just strips away any last credibility you may have had. I mentioned specifically Permaculture as a sustainable alternative that needs more research. Even current organic agriculture is a step up from chemical agriculture. You truly live in a bubble: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_environmental_issues True, things are slowly changing in some directions but regressing in others such as the pursuit of GM as an unnecessary solution to solve challenges which can be solved without it. Imagine how much further ahead we could be if all those billions biotech if swimming in were invested in researching truly sustainable tech. All seeds have a shelf life, even in seed banks. Also, seed banks protect seeds from the elements. This prevents them from adapting to the changing weather, atmosphere, soil conditions, micro-climates, etc. If the seed is not grow in its natural environment generation after generation, there's no guaranty that seeds saved today will survive the conditions in 50, 100, 500 years time. Besides there are so many varieties scattered across all over the globe, from farmers to small scale gardeners, that it'd impossible to collect them all. "Control it" is the key here isn't it? The arrogance of controlling nature to fit human needs at the expense of everything else is what brought us where we are today. Our own well being above all else, instead of collaboration and trying to live in harmony with other living beings and systems. You're confusing sanitized with pristine. The dinosaurs didn't go extinct due to the stupidity of their own doing. The same can be said about the species that go extinct everyday due to human selfishness and stupidity. It amazes me that on one hand you're all for technological advancement at any cost, fucking the planet over, and on the other you have the guts to blame nature for our own fuck up, which you wholly support. Your arguments are full of contradictions and baseless opinions showing that you are either very confused or just having a laugh. In either case, I've exhausted all I have to say. All the best.Patents will expire before GMO's become anywhere near so prevalent that you cannot find seeds that are not GMO.
Consumers really don't have much of one when nearly every product you can buy is GMO.
People will believe anything they are told, and bending to these stupid crazes does nothing.
GMO's do not need special labeling, although more information is always better.
Farmers aren't stupid.
They know how to keep a field's soil in a way that keeps it fertile year after year.
Heck, farming is nearly down to a science at this point.
How much do you know about farming by the way? You an expect? You ever spoken to a farmer? Ever bothered looking up the reasons behind the practices? Or are you just jumping on the social bandwagon of how horrible these GMO's are, how the unnatural farming techniques are making us unhealthy and stupid.
Magic flowers will power the world, cure all toxins, and feed people with almost no need for water at all.
I am only aware of 1) overfishing, and 2) global warming that are things that are looking to actually be catastrophic.
The number of wind farms has gone up far faster in recent years than the number of coal plants. Things are changing.
Why not in seed banks? Isn't it best to have the diversity in storage where nothing can learn to infect it?
As time passes we take more and more under our control, and learn to better and better control it.
No body of water is more pristine than those we purify for our cities.
I am sure the dinosaurs would agree.
History has not fared kindly to all those creatures that relied on nature to keep them alive. Nature will have a fit one day and kill us all if we don't stop it from doing so.
This is relavent:
http://thelogicofscience.com/2015/02/21/gmos-are-unnatural-but-so-is-everything-else-that-you-eat/ I'm going to attempt to narrow this down: Your issue with GMO's are:
1) GMO's could cross polinate into other plants and kill genetic diversity. 2) Modern agriculture is depleting and making our soils less healthy in the long run 3)By using too many GM crops, we are killing biodiversity and opening up vectors into disease. I'll respond to the "contradictions" later in this post. The first issue is a non-issue. There isn't anything inherent to GMO crops that makes them superior to natural crops in terms of spreading and taking over everything else. Cross pollination increases diversity, it doesn't lower it, and GMO crops are not unhealthy by nature of being GMO. The only possible issue here is if a company claimed that these plants that got cross pollinated are now owned by them, which gets into a legal grey area I cannot really comment on without knowing more about the subject. The second issue just isn't true. If it were, farms would see less crop growth every year. Instead, we see more output from the same amount of land as we improve techniques. The third issue is true,and I agree that we should be attempting to ensure we have diversity in the crops we plant. Heck, even monsanto agrees and apparently tells the people buying their seeds to do so. ___ Do you agree that the massive focus on gluten free foods being healthy has any bearing in reality? Do you agree that the focus on organic crops holds any bearing on reality? Do you think that any of these things are actually making people healthier, or are they just things companies slap on their products to sell things. A craze is the movement itself in culture. I am not calling the people following the crazes "Stupid crazes". I may be calling them idiots, however. A label being required to be given is different than a label being requested and given. GMO crops do not need a label because GMO is just another one of those terms that means little in the long run. They aren't directly unhealthy, and it's not misleading to leave crops not labeled as GMO, especially when the modern day assumption is that they are. The current system, you assume GMO unless stated otherwise. It works just as well as a label saying a crop is GMO. Forcing companies to slap GMO on products as if they are somehow hazardous is misleading and pointless. It matters because you are stating clearly false things that border on conspiracy without any apparent context of farms. Also, when I said farms, I did not mean having a garden in your backyard, or having a little 100 acre farm. I am talking about the real, industral, farms that feed the nations today. Have you ever talked to people who work, who maintain the fields, who manage the crops, etc? Do you understand the reasons for fertilizers? I am asking if you are ignorant, because you appear to be. No. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v485/n7397/full/nature11069.html http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/organic-farming-yields-and-feeding-the-world-under-climate-change/ Imagine farms suddenly having to use up to 25% more land to provide the same amount of food, along with a decent loss in ability to mass produce crops due to organic farming not being nearly as automated as industrial farming is. Honestly, the best thing to do in a situation like this is to create taxes and put the prices of fixing economic damages back onto the farms which use fertilizer. Once that happens, pollution is factored into the equation of "Is it worth it to do this" and farmers will compensate and change appropriately. The fact is that organic vs regular farming is situational. organic is useful in some areas, while regular is useful in others. On a list that includes things like light pollution, I wouldn't call that a list of serious or a list of catastrophic environmental issues. Impossible to determine without lots of study. What we have now is the result that modern farming techniques are the only things that allow our current populations to be a large as they are. We know that industrialization and centralization of farming has resulted in humanity being able to produce much more food than not. We do not know if similar investment in alternate methods would have produced the same results. Invest as much money as you want into the hunter-gather method, it won't outproduce farming. I bet you are sitting in a climate controlled room, that has access to a modern power grid, near a modern road, etc right now. All examples our mankinds arrogant controlling of nature. That is hypocrisy speaking. Humans do go above all. Humans are more important than the environment, and the environment is only important when harming it hurts humans in some form as well. I don't care about the species that go extinct at our expense, unless those species could have benefited mankind somehow had we discovered them, or if the loss of those species prevents us from farming and feeding our people. They went extinct because they were animals. They lived along with nature for however many years until the day came that nature changed on them. Do or die. Humanity either grasps control of the world around us, or it grasps control of us, and kills us without mercy. (seeing that it has no mind, that isn't say much) I will pick tap water over river water every day of the week, month, year, and century. Minus when there are boil-water orders out. Pretty natural water can kill incredibly quickly, even if it is generally safe. Nature killing us because we caused global warming is not what I am talking about. If humankind lived in harmony with nature, we would still be like the old indians. Hunting nomads, with little technology, low populations, and regular disasters wiping out areas of the population. It is our abandonment of the environment, the adoption of controlling the world around us, that enables us to grow to massive sizes, have huge numbers of minds thinking and inventing, eventually leading us away from this planet, and away from the ability for a single meteor to leave us all dead.You said before that people are not stupid and you're now calling people who don't follow your way of thinking "stupid crazes".
Can you please explain how can you have more information without labelling?
If you mean military science, then I'd wholly agree. War zone is the most accurate metaphor to describe mono-cultures where everything else is killed but the crop for human consumption.
What does my background matter for? Are you looking for reasons to personally attack me because you're running out of arguments?
Even current organic agriculture is a step up from chemical agriculture.
You truly live in a bubble: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_environmental_issues
Imagine how much further ahead we could be if all those billions biotech if swimming in were invested in researching truly sustainable tech.
"Control it" is the key here isn't it? The arrogance of controlling nature to fit human needs at the expense of everything else
The dinosaurs didn't go extinct due to the stupidity of their own doing.
You're confusing sanitized with pristine.
and on the other you have the guts to blame nature for our own fuck up, which you wholly support.
In a passive-aggressive argument, who wins: The most passive or the most aggressive? The one who stoops lowest first, obviously.