(June 2, 2013 at 9:13 am)Tiberius Wrote: Yes, I do realise that. Do you realise that the farmer owns the fields and can therefore do pretty much whatever he wants with them? He could decide that instead of producing wheat, he now wants a dairy farm, converting all of his fields into pastures. Would that have a knock-on effect for the ecosystem that has so far existed thanks to the wheat fields? Yes. It doesn't matter though; it's not going to somehow destroy all similar ecosystems across the country.
That ignores the fact that geneticaly supirior crops would displace the less supirior crops and therefor have a more damaging effect on the surrounding ecosystem than cowshit.
Like I mentioned before.....
And you ignored before.
[
Quote:What are these negative effects exactly? The Monsanto crop isn't impervious to pests; it's impervious to pesticides. If some of the seed starts to grow in surrounding fields that aren't treated with the Monsanto pesticide, it'll still get eaten by the pests.
Do I really need to repeat myself. You could simply state that you chose to ignore that supirior crops decimate the other crops in the surrounding ecosystem.
Quote:Also...most farms aren't near cities.
Have you ever been on the countryside?
What was your intention to prove with that statement? Because it doesnt show anything, if at all it underlines my point that farmers will take influence on the surrounding ecosystems.
Quote:Dentist son? WTF are you on about?
You simply seem utterly disconected with the world, like in your previous statement.
Quote:You should really look into aid, because if you think it's all free, you are having a laugh. A lot of government aid is based on loans which need to be repaid.
alot - does not mean all. And most aid - is free - that`s the very concept of aid.
Quote:My point was that we also sell food to other countries that need it.
And do it without monsanto or washing food in chlorine or through destroying local farmers and the ecosystem.
Quote:Food is also sold to other countries who need it, which was my point. Also that more food = more food available to be given / sold to other countries.
more food = less value = end of buisness for small farmers
Quote:I never said it was.
But you write as if it was.
Quote:Again, you don't seem to understand how these plants are genetically "superior". They are resistant not to a pest, but to a pesticide, produced by Monsanto.
They also grow faster.
Quote:If the crop is planted and treated with the Monsanto pesticide, they resist the pesticide and the pesticide kills the pest. If the crop is planted but not treated with the Monsanto pesticide (i.e. it strays to a field that is not using the Monsanto seed), it will be vulnerable to the pest.
but still are more supirior to the other crops through faster groath.
Quote:There is nothing about the plants themselves which makes them "superior" in the way they grow with other crops. It's purely on the way they resist one pesticide produced by Monsanto. Your ideas are more in line with the ravings of the anti-GMO crowd than they are with reality.
they also grow faster, which is intended to create more harvests.
Quote:For someone who seems to be such a fan of regulation, you don't seem to understand how it works...
explain.
Quote:In what way are they "low quality"? They are the same seed, but have just been genetically modified to be resistant to a certain pesticide. If anything, they are better quality...
And negatively influence local ecology.
Quote:Right, yes that's how debates work. As soon as a decision is made, nobody can ever talk about it again.
California banned gay marriage. I guess they can never have gay marriage again by your pathetic logic.
Newsflash. We're not in German parliament. We're debating whether the decision was a good one or not.
And it was.
Quote:Have you finally lost it?
Nope.
"What if" arguments are useless arguments which deserve nothing else but to be flushed down the toilet.
Only facts count in a debate.
And not your dystopic fantasy future, the existance of which depends on a if which is a word whos meaning seems to have been forgotten.