So year or so ago I watched Food Inc.

This one went into GMOs, Monsanto etc. a bit more in depth and included biodiversity and some tid bit of info I didn't know.

1) GMO yields are initially great....but diminish overtime as weeds and bugs overcome the pesticidal effects of the GMO crop and Roundup chemicals...thus over time (like 10 years) the yields decrease to the level that are on par with conventional, organics.

2) the science as to the long term health effects of both GMOs and Roundup have NOT been proven. It's asserted by the industry and rubber stamped by the 1 regulatory captured federal agency and anyone who disagrees is not dumptrucked with exhaustive raw data they can read for themselves but stonewalled, ridiculed, or attacked.

Now, I know enough of the scientific method that if you can't or won't share your raw data it's probably because it doesn't add up to the conclusions you want.

We find this in the man-made global warming debate, the abortion debate, gun debate, even in homosexuality (the APA is decidedly quiet about the 'science' backing their 1973 decision to de-list SSA).

Once you start reading the justifications for some industry's claims (which results in a de facto monopoly and gazillions of dollars) you don't have to go far before you run into gobbledegook.

Which is really troubling and worrying to me. With all the weird cancers (few women in the 3rd world get breast cancer....few boys are getting autism or ADD in foreign countries...) the whole gluten allergy thing - it's real and it's scary that it blooms out of nowhere and we're not allowed to even question the food supply.

it's to the point where I had to pause before clicking "post" for fear of being put on another "list"

You realize that GMO's and the use of Glyophosate have been around for decades, and yields are not declining, but increasing..in reality right?

You realize that there is an entire industry, set up around scaring the living shit out of the ignorant with pseudo science, in order to promote a less than sustainable form of agriculture that is not profitable without the ignorant sheep buying into the proven false claims...in reality right?

I take it you are leading the charge to ban Dihydrogenmonoxide for use in modern Ag practices as well. The shit is evil.

Did you find a leash for your Pet rock yet?
They really do need daily exercise.

Lots of things have been around for decades. That proves nothing.

Yields keep going up you say?
superbugs and superweeds are not adapting you say?

Capitalism is the superior economic system, but it is not intrinsically moral. Monopolies can form and they tend to be self-serving to the point of being myopic. Big tobacco comes to mind. They also claimed "centuries" of experience and also claimed scientific backing for tobacco having no connection with lung disease. They too owned politicians and were big ag. (still are). But the actual science eventually came out (at what a human cost in lives and addiction)?

My point in this is not to be a Luddite, not to ban pesticides or herbicides but to point out caution.

The either/or argument ('either we uncritically accept Monsanto's version or we all starve") is bs.

But you have the intellectual and moral highground right. You can dump truck science on me right?

Well get to it then.

Science, real science, is never "proven".  Thought we'd settled that with the whole APCC argument where they tried to shut down dissenting opinion by saying that it was "proven".

Newtonian physics were "proven" for centuries, till Relativity upset the apple cart.*

I'm not a paranoid fanatic about anything, but I do believe we sometimes don't know as much as we think we do.  And that cubed and squared if someone's making money off of it.

Although hoping for a civil, intellectual discussion in GD is truly wishful thinking.

*I am quite aware that Newtonian physics is "close enough" that NASA still uses it for > 99% of it's calculations.  The fact remains that Relativity was quite revolutionary.

I love these threads.  I'll check in later to see how funny it gets.

Bloodletting has been around for over 2000 years before people realized it was harmful -- the age of harmful habits is usually more of a function of how profitable they are.

Regardless if yields increased, decreased, or stayed the same -- the artificial modification of food plants to allow them to be drenched in toxic poisons should be illegal.

You can choose to eat foods grown like that if you choose. No-one will stop you.  I choose not to every chance I get -- mostly because my body nor my family have a listing for  recommended daily intake of poison.

The part I find funny.... I've seen people spray roundup on their sidewalks, accidentally get some on their hands and run inside to wash them... Yet, those same people think nothing of the food they eat every day that swims in the same chemical.

Non GMO crops are soaked in even more chemicals.

Lol.....not here.  

It's hard to find a balance bc treehuggers and those who defend the likes of Monsanto are truly ignorant self righteous peeps.

I might wander up and take a gander.
Last time I went was like 3-4 years ago...the useful info for us Tree and bush fruit guys is limited, but a couple buds on the import/export side are going to be there, so I might go hear the fat lady sing.

You going?

Your grasp of modern agricultural practices is weak, and embarrassingly "misinformed" to be charitable about it.

It's always easy to tell who the citiots are in these threads, as they are entirely clueless and simply parrot the disinformation and populist lies they read on Facebook, and are spoonfed by the Organic fraud industry.

We use several OMRI approved pesticides because of their short PHI/REI, and several are more toxic to humans than the synthetic compounds we also use.

Your approach to the matter is

OMG, so true.

I can't believe I ate corn, wheat, and soybean stalks for so long. Don't get me started on the leaves...

As a farmer myself I thought I'd give a little insight here. Yes as a whole yields continue to increase, but GMO's along with poor management are helping to cause chemical resistance in weeds. We can almost watch it happening. Glysophate or "round up" can't kill everything, you need a 2-4D or other product sometimes. And farmers are planting GM round up ready crops, spraying over it with round up, and not killing certain plants. Our rates of oz of chemical per acre have more than tripled to get a kill in the last 10 years or so. The days of exclusive no-till farming are winding down I'm afraid



 

I like food.



Grocery stores have food.



Grocery stores are good.



Food is good.

 

I'll probably swing up then.
It's only an hour drive, and Longstroth is supposed to be detailing the SWD info collected from last season.

I gotta look into which day and all that still.

No kidding! Who wants to become extinct like grain bin Rats.

I am sitting on the fence about GMOs. I personally don't
know much about the subject. My goal is to have a very large garden
for a few reasons such as I can save some money, I know what I
an growing and control what is sprayed and the most important reason
it relaxes me.
Now I don't spray my veggies with round up but I sure do use it
to prepare my garden before planting.
I only spray for bug killing when i see a large pest problem. I try to plant things
that do not need much in care. I do rotate my plantings from year to year
If you gave me a GMO ear of corn I will eat it. I am sure I ate worst things in my life.

I'd be more concerned about all pesticides the grains get treated with as they go in storage then GMO crops. But there is no way around that, the world would starve if all the grains got chewed up by insects in the bins and elevators. We treat our seed wheat bins with Tempo, then treat the grain going in for storage, what's planted gets treated so it doesn't get are in the ground, then what doesn't get planted goes to the elevator where they have treated and fumigated. So it's probably not the healthiest considering it's all treated multiple times with insecticides, but it's the only way to feed everyone

 

There are several interrelated but different things going on here.

1) Monsanto is a business. Capitalism as an economic system is the best. But it is not, in and of itself, moral. Selling drugs is also 'capitalism'. Prostitution is too. So was slavery. My point is that when a person, group, company, or industrial complex stands to make a mountain of money, their credibility with respect to any research that might put a sizable dent in that money stream goes DOWN, not up.

Big tobacco wasn't about to own up to the cancer causing nature of tobacco. It makes sense that if you could make a fortune and lie, most people would be tempted to make a fortune and lie or fudge or misdirect people or come out with "studies" that only run for 3 months (when their real study was 1 year long and all the bad effects cropped up in month's 4+).

2) Modern ag is not synonymous with GMOs.... it's a 1-2 punch....first they modify the actual plant (and patent it) so it only grows for one season....so you can't save seed and you need to purchase more from the supplier each season....then they modify the plant more to resist herbicide and create toxins to kill bugs (so the plants we eat have built in pesticidal effects)....then they douse the fields with Round up.

In organic legacy seed farming you'd still need herbicides and pesticides of some type but the plant itself wouldn't be modified. It would produce seed and it wouldn't produce toxins.

3) Yields.... the only people who claim GMO are superior are the ones selling the GMO seeds.... but many farmers have admitted that years 1-3 the yields are big....but over 10 years they settled down to about what organics did.... so the claim that without GMOs we're all gonna starve is just BS.

4) family farms....it was always labor intensive and the profit margins were always small. But some industrial scale farming also runs small profit margins as their costs have gone up with the equipment, the need for seed each year, the need for the chemicals, fertilizers, herbicides, pesticides, transport, storage, etc. having thousands of small farms closer to population centers vs. a hundred massive company fields hundreds of miles away makes more logistical sense.

I don't think we're getting an accurate look at the economy of farming when huge ag bills give farmers tax $ or credits. It's like subsidizing solar and declaring solar a superior way of producing electricity....paying farmers or propping up the bushel price...subsidizing corn or soy.... that all distorts the market. It's not capitalism when you do that. So are organic methods really less profitable apples to apples when you count for everything? I don't know and would love to know where to go to find out.

So there are shennanigans going on.... Monsanto has a legal right to seek a profit....but they do tend to drive people out of business via the claims that spores from GMO that land in fields constitute infringement on their patents.... plus their (still legal) habit of regulatory capture.... it gives me the feeling of Umbrella corp. there are limits to capitalism when profits become more important than health.

Monoculture.... if we go entirely to GMOs and 95% of the crop becomes a monoculture....and then something goes wrong....then we all starve before the seed banks can crank out enough backup seeds to save us. This is strategically 'bad thing'.

The defenders of the agricultural corporation usually do resort to personal attacks.   thanks for proving the point.

Your response does nothing to prove your point other than calling my opinion one of fraud.  Throwing around a few technical acronyms to does not make your view more correct.  You are welcome to your own opinion though. Enjoy it!

My point was not specific to organic nor synthetic chemicals.  I choose no chemicals in my own garden and whenever I am able to from outside farms.  

I keep reading terms like "soaked" or "drenched" with chemicals.  It shows how ignorant people are about ag and ag chemical usage.  Through the course of a growing season we will put one half gallon of glyph per acre on soybeans.  Go out and look at an acre sized piece of ground and imagine spreading a half gallon over it.

Drenched, really?

so here's the deal..... if the science is clear and the data uniformly and overwhelmingly points to GMOs not being a problem...why the defensive attitude, and ad hominems, the "to ask any question critical of this is sign of insanity" attitude that normally is the tactic of the global warmists or the population controllers. Or any number of leftist so-called elites?

Why does it feel like a religion where you have to be 'inside' to understand it and no one's talking to outsiders?

If anyone is turning their positions into a religion, it's the anti-GMO, anti-fracking, anti-human, global warming believing whackos.

The hypocrisy is strong with this one



In before move to GD!



 

Imagine someone falsely accusing you of heinous crimes, lying, stealing, and killing people slowly for huge profits that don't exist.

Then make their accusations standardized dogma, that is parroted by several million brain dead religious zealots, that are hell bent to demonize your heritage, culture, lifestyle and livelyhood.

When they make a statement, it is filled with insulting lies. When they attempt to engage in conversation, they start with accusing you of criminal and immoral activity as a basis of thier question.

Now.
Ask youself why in the blue fuck, anyone would treat these fucktarded, mouthbreathing, brain dead sheep, with any goddamned respect.
The cowards would get their ass beat for the insults and accusations, anywhere but in print, and on the net.

"Hi Farmer Bob, are you still stealing money from the taxpayer, and killing our children with your toxin drenched corn?"
Yeah, that's going to be a respectful conversation.


Ask an honest and fucking respectful question, and you will get honest and respectful answers.
Until then the "Insiders only" treatment you perceive, will always be there, and extended to any dipshit that starts tossing around the usual leftist Organic lies.

Starting the conversation with information gleaned from anti-Ag derpclods, and the socialist Organic Twats on facebook, and then parroting the usual Militant Organic fraud propaganda, Outed the OP for what he is, and his agenda. He's a DU Troll, or has never had an intelligent thought of his own.

If you can ask an honest question, and manage to be respectful, most folks in Ag are wide open and honest,about educating people that are fucking clueless....and it's patently obvious you are as clueless as the OP, just better about respect to a degree


For starters.
Do the math. Pesticides are damn expensive, and application equipment as well as regulatory compliance is expensive.
Only a mouth breathing moron, or dedicated fucking Organic Militant Liar, would accuse conventional farmers of "Drenching food with poison for profit".
Think about it. It's a fucking retarded statement, that screams agenda driven asshole.
Some years, rolling the dice and applying, or not applying a fungicide or insecticide, means the difference between paying the bills or losing the damn farm.
Margins are that tight in good years.

Try again if you wish.
Just remember that when you cite some Militant Organic bullshit study, that flies in the face of reality, you're doing it again, and you're probably going to get the same consideration given to any other Citiot.

S-28,
I was trying to think of a way to say just this. Thanks

Getting accused of something like that would suck.  No-one accused you in this thread of any of these things.  



Personal attacks and cursing removed...



See Below.




The original post was about GMOs and Roundup.  Not sure where you made the switch to Pesticides.

So.. to my question --  Why do people believe GMO's are necessary today?  Its an honest question -- I would like to hear real information that proves why these are necessary.

If the response is going to be a bunch of name calling or personal attacks -- feel free to write it down and send it to yourself - I'd rather not hear it.  IF anyone has any real evidence, I'd love to hear/see it.

Round up IS a "Pesticide". GMO's that allow the use of Glyphosate directly on crops, during the early stages of growth, are part of IPM practices that allow incorporation of a specific "Pesticide". OP's entire line of bullshit and propeganda, is about Pesticide use.

Part of being stupid is not knowing you are stupid, making stupid statements, and asking stupid questions. Agricultural illiteracy is a HUGE problem in this country,
and it's made worse by the arrogance of academic culture. Citiots don't even know they are stupid, because they arrogantly consider themselves learned.

It's no wonder you get treated like you do, and seem to think "only insiders understand" is some sort of road block for you gaining an understanding.
When citiots start slinging around the insults in the form of a question, most guys will either just ignore the fool as it's obvious they are an idiot, or fire back at the moron.

If you have ever dealt with a brain dead liberal in a conversation concerning the 2A, you have run into the fact, that their minds are locked around hysterical distortions of truth, and outright lies. "Nobody needs a machine gun to hunt", "Assault weapons kill thousands of children", "People who own guns are stupid Rednecks, and racists", "The NRA kills children to protect gun industry profits", "People who carry guns are dangerous", "Guns in the home, are more likely to kill family than intruders".
It's all bullshit and lies, that depends on the complete ignorance of the morons that gobble it it up, and the cultural divide between the Urban/suburban sheep mentality, and gun owners.
 
The same divide exists between the 98%+ of people in this country, that are three generations removed from agriculture, and the rest of us that actually Farm.
The same sheer ignorance, and blatant stupidity, makes them easy pickings for the anti-Ag socialist propeganda and their Organic marketing fraud.
Why do people think Organic means "Pesticide free" and some how "Safer" and more "Earth friendly"? Easy, they are stupid, and that is what they have been told.

Your Ag Illiteracy, apparently also keeps you from considering that accusing someone of drenching peoples food in poison, might be an insult, or that accusing someone of being part of some evil conspiracy, might be an insult. Think about it for a bit. Maybe it will come to you. It's no different than the anti-2A insults towards character and culture, as well as ethics and Morality.  Go back and read OP's post. Ask yourself how you would view it, if you spent a lifetime of busting your ass to produce safe chow, out of pride rather than the profits that are damn slim.

Why are GMO's necessary today?

They eliminate the use of many pesticides, Greatly reduce the use of other pesticides, reduce soil compaction issues, reduce top soil loss to runoff, reduce nitrogen and soil nutrient runoff, reduce waterway silting, greatly reduce particulate release into the air, increase efficiency, protect non target insect and animal species, and reduce handler exposure to pesticides amoung a shitload of other things.

If Round up resistant crops weren't used, more errosion and runoff means a crapload more junk in the water table.
Nitrogen in the water ways is a real issue, and no til is the answer.

Go back to conventional, and there is not only more errosion, top soil loss, and silt in the waterways from tilling to keep weed pressures down.
There is also a LOT more use of pre-emergent herbicides to reduce top soil loss from tilling.
With weeds, also comes insect and fungal pressures, which means more pesticides.

Yields are higher, reducing the need to till every sq. inch of ground, and spares more of the marginal ground that is better suited for other crops.

Want to protect the water?
GMO's are necessary.

Want to reduce Pesticides in the environment?
GMO's are necessary.

Want to reduce pollution from the production of Fertilizer?
GMO's are necessary.

If you go back to the 60's,70's, and 80's, things were pre-GMO and no till was just a new concept.
Soil conservation was in a crisis state during those times, and waterways were nowhere near as clean as they are now.

I have my issues with Monsanto.
GMO's and their actual advantages aren't one of them.

Evidence of harmful effects of GMO crops will be a "rainmaker" of a class action lawsuit.

The fact that one has not been filed yet is somewhat telling of the lack of evidence of harm from GMO crops.

LOL, GREAT post, and why so many tire of even replying to ill-informed, self-proclaimed experts. Kudos for trying to educate someone who already knows it all.
Watch a hack job "documentary", become an expert!

FWIW I am a licensed pesticide applicator and MOST of what I apply are herbicides.
Not that herbicides are pesticides.

Evil Blueberry grower/applicator/specialty crop grower/Tree fruit refugee.
I wish I only had to deal with Herbicides, because GMO's took care of the rest.

BT's, Pyrethrum and spinosads...
They are peachy keen and wonderful, when a hippy sprays them on Organic produce, and it's somehow healthy and "pesticide free".

If we spray the same shit...it's evil, baby killing,  attempted genocide, by slathering "poison" on peoples food.
Stupid people have obviously been allowed to breed, for  too long.

For a hoot sometime, ask one of the local Organic Hippies, what the heavy metals content of their Lime sulfur, is.
They aren't required to maintain documentation of analysis, and most are clueless as to how much lead, Zinc, arsenic etc. they are putting on peoples food.

While we are on the subject of doing the math I will add some more. As people in this thread have discussed the evils of pesticides and how toxic they are, there is a measure of toxicity for these chemicals known as LD50 or the amount of the substance needed to kill 50% of a test population. This is generally given in a mg/kg dose and the smaller the number the greater the toxicity. the LD50 of glyphosate (Roundup) is 10,000mg/kg so if you ingested 10,000 mg of roundup for each kg of body weight you would probably die. Here is where the math comes in LD50 for table salt is 3,000 mg/kg, and caffeine is lower than that. So before we talk about all the toxins that are applied to crops maybe we should figure out what is actually toxic.

Good point.

I can tell you that paraquat is very toxic stuff. Don't know the LD50, but I bet it's under 100mg/kg.

I won't work with it, just from a safety standpoint.

Yep!
It's nasty. But if you need dessication in a hurry, there is no other.
I'll run it after spring rains have kept me out of the fields too long, new growth on bushes has started, and glyphosate would knock them back.

Ingestion is 700mg/KG  which is a good bit more than an unintentional ingestion.
All the same, it's full protective gear including respirator for mixing.

These type of threads always bring out the closet hippies.

It's amazing bait, to be sure.

It's also demonstrated some farmers are just as hysterical as the hippies they so hate.

How dare you Citiot!

/sarcasmOFF

So much derp...