The world according to Monsanto II

[Short Game]

"Haters," henh.

 

[massey990]

"Haters," henh.

"haters" of what? Or are you the type that are blind to the observant or the ones in this thread that should "get a room" because they seem to be lovebirds

 

[Don87]

An unfounded opinion published by someone with ties to a university IS NOT a study that is attributed to that university.....It is simply an unfounded opinion....just like YOUR unfounded opinion....

As of this point, you have still FAILED (miserably I might add) to list a valid UNIVERSITY sanctioned STUDY.....Since you OBVIOUSLY can't, as well as DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE, it is apparent that your lack of credibility IS well founded.

I was trying to cut you some slack on this one(and maybe someone said this already, I haven't checked), but the "someone with ties to a universtity", would be like a professor............ya know............the same type of person that teaches 'you' in your endeavor to obtain your Masters Degree.

But maybe the college you are attending hasn't caught up with the world yet.

 

[Don87]

College kid? You're kidding right? I'm 64 years old Sparky..... I have degrees from 4 Universities, working on a 5th. In the last 40 years, there's only been a couple short spans of less than 2 years each where I wasn't enrolled in some sort of degree program. I have farmed most of my life, and have actual hands on experience with regards to GMO crops, and LEGITIMATE lab studies on such.

I have no problem with this thread surviving...I DO have a problem with people posting lies, deception, erroneous information, rumors, innuendo, and simple "bad science" to promote a personal agenda. If you cannot use REAL FACTS to base one's opinion on, EXPECT me to point out the shear lunacy of the contrived nonsense.
What you perceive as "Smart-***" is simply someone with actual knowledge of the subject pointing out the foolishness of those who do not have a clue what they're talking about. If that strikes a raw nerve with you, so be it. Seems a few of your collegues want to dish out insults, but when they get a dose of their own medicine, they whine and cry like a cat with it's tail caught in a car door. If you want to play hardball with the big boys, learn to take your lumps.....If you want this to be a mutual admiration society for tree huggers, start your own website and collect up all the nut jobs and take them with you.

Nature "modifies" itself every second of every day. What scientist are doing is to target "modifications" in a controlled manner rather than the willy nilly random adaptations so as to sustain life on this planet. Without the work done to "modify nature" as you put it, we would still be at the same production rates as we were in the 1800's. Food would have ran out for most of the worlds populous decades ago. Whether you like it or not, whether you UNDERSTAND it or not, the newest technology is FAR SAFER than allowing the vast majority of the world to starve to death. Cross breeding of crops has been around since the beginning of agriculture. The SCIENCE of cross breeding plants was begun in earnest about 65 years ago. What we are experiencing NOW is that same science taken to a whole new level. In spite of what some may think, we cannot turn back time and return to the stone age.

With all due respect sir, I have posted no lies.............Although I was mistaken on my BIL's crop planting.

The first year was corn on ten acres, with roughly 4 acres beside it planted in soybean as a "trap crop" as he described it to keep the deer from the corn.

Second year was all corn, and according to him..........the weeds that I described(with the red tint) showed up in that section of corn that was previously planted in soybean.

He planted the oats this year, but couldn't get rid of that specific weed that showed up, the weedkiller he used wouldn't get rid of it.

The only thing I've posted is things available on the internet that are available to anyone.

 

[Don87]

Just you...

From Study finds causes of Colony Collapse Disorder in bees - Telegraph

That's the latest "cause" apparently. It's still not settled one way or the other for certain but a lot of factors seem to point to it being close if not the proverbial cigar. Who knows, maybe tomorrow it will be a different cigar!

BTW, "correlation" has nothing to do with "causation". It's like arguing that since A and B regularly occur together, A therefore must be the cause of B when in reality it's just a coincidence that A and B happen to occur together.

I agree that it's not settled, but some of the studies have shown as much as 98 pesticides in the honey of honeybees that are transported to pollinate crops...............

 

[Don87]

Nature "modifies" itself every second of every day. .

That's cause there are certain groups that have the odacity to think that they have the ability(with their feeble human minds) to outhink nature.

 

[peabody]

i have no clue about how monsantos herbicides work... never used it.

but i do have lots of time and miles hauling the stuff.
im a semi tanker driver..

i've probly hauled millions of gallons of monsanto's products.

working for monsanto dispatch is a nightmare.
left hand has no clue what the right hand is doing.
cannot tell you how many times i've pulled into a elevator , and been told ... the truck just left...[grrrr]
or WHERE THE HECK YOU BEEN !?!?!
? WE'VE BEEN OUTTA PRODUCT FOR THREE DAYS !!!!!!

or... we need you to load at three AM ... and theres no third shift to load you.

or you have 1100 gallons left on... in portland.. they sit you for two days, while they scratch their heads , wondering what to do with you.

no.... i dont haul for monsanto anymore. i refuse to.

peabody

 

[Don87]

Yes...Learn to use a computer......Learn to disseminate info given, as well as how to follow links provided to text of reports. In other words, get an education BEFORE attempting to act like you know what you're talking about.

You had the nerve to complain about needing links to what I posted, but it's ok for someone else to post links that can't be followed.............you sir are definitely on a 'one man crusade'................................................Don't need a degree to see that one.

 

[Don87]

It's funny that my 64 years have proven to me that things aren't always as they appear, even in what we might think of as controlled experiments/environments, much less the world at large. We are now at the point, as an anthropology professor friend has said, mankind could be the greatest natural catastrophe the world has seen.

We can do many tricks. Some of the tricks work, even when the underlying science is incomplete or even wrong. The level of complexity in the trickery today is extraordinary. While many of us prefer to err on the side of caution, believing that first, we should do no harm, others, as if drunk with their book-learning (not to mention, possible personal gain), seem willing to risk anything, including what is ethically not theirs to risk. Screw the potentialities, full speed ahead.

What could possibly go wrong?

Nice post...........thank you.

 

[Don87]

So we're supposed to just believe you have 4+ degrees? Where's the proof? How do we know you're 64? You post like a 19 year old that passed a couple college science classes & now thinks he knows everything. And that just because you did a little science experiment, & what you thought would happen appears to have actually happened, you're now an expert ... I'm sorry, THE expert.

In any case, assuming it's true, all those degrees make it sound a lot more like you're a professional student, aka a theorist, then a professional anything else. Nonetheless, a 64 year old farmer with 5 degrees & the inability to post calm, mature, rational responses to posts online he deems inaccurate - I bow to you. You are The Master.



That's right, nature modifies itself ... It's humans modifying nature that concerns me.



I'm not so sure that would've been a bad thing. You're implying that over-populating the world, & continuing to do so at better & better rates, is a good thing. Where does it stop?



Safer for who? I think I'd be a lot safer with say 6 million people on earth rather than 6 billion, or whatever the figure is.



Again ... even if you are dead right about all this, why do you have to come across as such a d!ck about it? In my experience most educated professionals that are actually correct do not have to be A-holes to convey their correctness. Actually, I do know one professional engineer who is like that: Everybody thinks he's an A-hole, but he is completely clueless to it. You can no longer claim to have not been told.

I was trying to think of similar examples that show that even though you believe 65 years of doing something sets it in stone that it's right, does not necessarily mean it's so. Communism might work: For many, many years many people thought communism was a good idea. Some still do. I think the masses now know better. Flat Earth might work; How long did many people believe the earth was flat. I imagine plenty of smart-for-their-time scientists did their studies, calculations & experiments & were able to prove without a serious doubt by most that the earth is flat, & it wasn't until many, many years later that Flat Earth was proven wrong.

....+78