Solid Smackdown of Anti-GMO zealotry

#76
#76
Monsanto manipulates patent law and the 3rd world suffers. Processes that have been used for hundreds of years in Iraq have been retroactively claimed by Monsanto. People starve because the US uses their influence to strong arm them to follow our patent laws. I've read that farmers in India have committed suicide because Monsanto patents destroyed their business.

GMOs are fine but Monsanto can go **** themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#77
#77
Monsanto manipulates patent law and the 3rd world suffers. Processes that have been used for hundreds of years in Iraq have been retroactively claimed by Monsanto. People starve because the US uses their influence to strong arm them to follow our patent laws. I've read that farmers in India have committed suicide because Monsanto patents destroyed their business.

GMOs are fine but Monsanto can go **** themselves.

Amen!!!
 
#78
#78
Monsanto manipulates patent law and the 3rd world suffers. Processes that have been used for hundreds of years in Iraq have been retroactively claimed by Monsanto. People starve because the US uses their influence to strong arm them to follow our patent laws. I've read that farmers in India have committed suicide because Monsanto patents destroyed their business.

GMOs are fine but Monsanto can go **** themselves.

Control the food supply and you control the masses, simple as that.Not entirely sold on GMOs either.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 71
#79
#79
Monsanto manipulates patent law and the 3rd world suffers. Processes that have been used for hundreds of years in Iraq have been retroactively claimed by Monsanto. People starve because the US uses their influence to strong arm them to follow our patent laws. I've read that farmers in India have committed suicide because Monsanto patents destroyed their business.

GMOs are fine but Monsanto can go **** themselves.

The third world, in places like Africa and India, suffers because their corn yields (their largest source of food) are less than 1/5 of those in the U.S. and 1/3 - 1/4 of those in Brazil, Argentina and China, respectively. This difference is owed to the continued depletion of soil fertility caused by decades of extracting nutrients during crop harvests without replenishing these important elements via fertilizers, organic or mineral, a practice that the rest of the world has adopted.

Over the past 12 years or so the Agriculture and Food Security Center at the Earth Institute, Columbia University has worked to improve rural livelihoods, human nutrition, and environmental sustainability in sub-Saharan Africa. They've done this by leading the United Nations Millennium Project Hunger Task Force, which recommended policies to overcome hunger to African governments and development partners.

These policies include:
- increasing the use of fertilizers and hybrid corn with subsidies and government support

- and conducting research on any potentially negative environmental impacts of increased fertilizer use in Africa.

The India suicides are a result of debt accumulation unable to be paid back due to cotton crop failures. Failures that were predominantly attributed to a two year drought in the region. A phenomenon even noted by those trying to place the blame on Monsanto. Damn Monsanto, why'd you go and turn the rain off on those Indians? The cost of inputs was greater than what it traditionally was due to added seed costs from switching from conventional seed to GE seed. However, the debt would've been non-existent had the weather cooperated and yields panned out. Trying to blame Monsanto for a suicide in that instance is a reach of epic proportions. That's like blaming a company for the death of a former employee who turned into an alcoholic after losing his job.

GE cotton containing the Bt trait (insect resistance) in India out-yields non-Bt cotton by 80% and local hybrids by 87%. This is based on research conducted by UC Berkley and the University of Bonn (Germany).

Dow, DuPont, Bayer etc. have all contributed to the GE movement, especially the seed side, and all have no-replant contract clauses, with stipulated repercussions. This isn't confined solely to one company. But whereas the others are diversified in their business ventures, with agriculture only being a portion of their business, Monsanto is strictly an agricultural technology company so they undeservingly take the bulk of the heat.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#84
#84
One of the all time great VN smack downs.

I like the part where he used the analogy about someone losing their job and turning into an alcoholic, it reminds me of the Obama's campaign where they blame Romney for the woman dying of cancer who lost her insurance allegedly.
 
#85
#85
Monsanto Hid Decades Of Pollution | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community

Just one of many of Monsantos evil doings. Also if GMO's are as harmless as Monsanto claims, why do they fight so hard about GMO labeling? What's the problem? I am not anti GMO but it does seem odd.

Because the common person is uneducated and misinformed on the concept. Therefore, there would either be a huge undertaking of trying to educate, which they try to do now the best they can, or sales/profits would suffer because people would avoid those products. It's not that GMO's are unsafe that would drive away sales, it's the stigma that they're unsafe.
 
#87
#87
Dude seriously you are defending the all time patent trolls. The scum of the earth. Everybody should be against patent trolls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#88
#88
Dude seriously you are defending the all time patent trolls. The scum of the earth. Everybody should be against patent trolls.

Upwards of billions of dollars goes into developing new hybrids. How are they to recoup the R&D and production costs without patents? That's the point of a patent. Once a patent expires, like glyphosate did (Round-Up), the bottom falls out of the market. Why don't you hate DuPont, Dow, Syngenta? They all do the same thing.

Why should we hate patent trolls? It's that protection that incentives people to develop new technologies. Without these technologies yields would still be lagging behind. Soybean yields have increased by almost 30% since the introduction of RR technology and corn yields have increased by almost 15%. With less and less land available and what is available increasing so much in value, more food and fiber will have to be produced on a stagnant or declining number of acres. Hard feat to accomplish with a growing population if we're going to go back to farming like its the 50's.

I notice you didn't dispute the facts of what's happened in India. The patent laws aren't what killed their operations, their drought stricken crops are what killed their operations. Bt cotton was introduced in India in 2002, notice the yield history since its introduction. Also note that India experienced 4 historic droughts over a time frame of 12 years, ending in 2012. I bet you can pick out what years that occurred based on yield history.

http://www.indexmundi.com/agriculture/?country=in&commodity=cotton&graph=production

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/09/04/business/global/drought-in-india-devastates-crops-and-farmers.html?referrer=
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#90
#90
Dude seriously you are defending the all time patent trolls. The scum of the earth. Everybody should be against patent trolls.

Monsanto aren't patent "trolls", e.g. defending a patents against infringement doesn't make them a troll. That's smart business.

Patent trolls typically do not invent, develop or provide good or services - they just buy patents and sue those who have infringed. They are the poster child of why a loser pay tort reform is needed.

Monsanto is evil but they aren't patent trolls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#91
#91
I repeat, Monsanto has patented processes that are hundreds of years old. They do not invent everything they patent. They just have the best lawyers. They don't even do business in Iraq (maybe they do now) but they still try to tell them how to till the land they and their forefathers have tilled for millenia.

They are patent trolls
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#92
#92
I repeat, Monsanto has patented processes that are hundreds of years old. They do not invent everything they patent. They just have the best lawyers. They don't even do business in Iraq (maybe they do now) but they still try to tell them how to till the land they and their forefathers have tilled for millenia.

They are patent trolls

Yes, GE'ing has gone on for centuries, only moronic sheep claim Monsanto started this. And what does tilling have to do with anything? Tillage practices have nothing to do with biotechnology. Do you know what tillage even means?

And again, you blame one company. You're positive that Dow and Dupont have solely developed their own seed technology while Monsanto is the only one to "steal" technology? Or is it that you know the name Monsanto and are clueless of the role that BASF, Bayer, DuPont, Dow and Syngenta play in the field of agricultural biotechnology?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#93
#93
Monsanto has Round-Up Ready crops that are resistant to glyphosate herbicides

Bayer has Liberty Link soybeans that are resistant to glufosinate herbicides

Dow is introducing Enlist Duo soybeans and cotton that are resistant to 2,4-D herbicides

Monsanto is introducing Xtend soybeans and cotton that are resistant to glyphosate and Dicamba

Monsanto has Bt corn to control corn borers

Syngenta has Agrisure corn controlling 16 above and below ground pests.

Everyone has skin in the patent and GE game and everyone requires a grower to sign what some call a stewardship agreement, that outlines the terms and conditions of growing crops with a certain trait package.
 
Last edited:
#94
#94
People will not/can not produce enough food to feed themselves. Right now there is no incentive for the people that have the resources to do so.

My dad looking at setting aside part of his herd for "organic" milk, the only real requirement (like milk isn't organic already) is that the cow never has received antibiotics or any form of steroids/growth hormone.

I find this hilarious that people are willing to pay double to triple for this non-sense.

One of the best is the labeling of "hormone free chicken". The poultry farmers don't inject hormones as is. But one of them somewhere along the way, capitalized on the idiocy of the general public and created a branding/marketing opportunity.

Or "free range chickens", the biggest stipulation to qualify for this is the door on a chicken house or coop has to be left open. As a farmer told me just this week, chickens are so stupid they know where their food is, where do you think they'll run off to?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#95
#95
Because the common person is uneducated and misinformed on the concept. Therefore, there would either be a huge undertaking of trying to educate, which they try to do now the best they can, or sales/profits would suffer because people would avoid those products. It's not that GMO's are unsafe that would drive away sales, it's the stigma that they're unsafe.

It's funny to watch you defend a company like Monsanto. Please don't stop.
 
#97
#97
It's even more funny to watch someone like you disparage a company like Monsanto with your belly full.

if I had a choice to eat food not produced by Monsanto, I would. However, in this day and age it's impossible. What's even funnier is you seem to have no problem with Monsanto. Maybe you should take the red pill for a change.
 
#99
#99
if I had a choice to eat food not produced by Monsanto, I would. However, in this day and age it's impossible. What's even funnier is you seem to have no problem with Monsanto. Maybe you should take the red pill for a change.

What problem should I have with Monsanto? I like cheap and plentiful food.
 

VN Store



Back
Top