|
Yrat
Hello

Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 2,312
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: ScavengerType]
#14012024 - 02/23/11 05:27 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
well this thread didn't take too long to get immensely off-track.
-------------------- "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." -Henry David Thoreau Strike The Root
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: Yrat]
#14012338 - 02/23/11 08:35 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
AlphaFalfa said:
Zappa does make heavy claims with little research to back it.
I made one claim. That GE crops increase yields. You provided me with the research that supports that although you lied about it and selectively quoted from it to create a false impression. Although I most certainly could have found many more articles I found it particularly gratifying to use your own petard on which to hoist you.
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
--------------------
|
Joe Joe
2nd Level Meditator


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 190
Loc: Vortex #4
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14013531 - 02/23/11 01:21 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
No, we don't. Why don't you provide some links?
|
Joe Joe
2nd Level Meditator


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 190
Loc: Vortex #4
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: Joe Joe]
#14013559 - 02/23/11 01:27 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Back to the topic.
Fox, CNN, and everybody else did this to Ron Paul in the 08' race too. Every time they did a poll, Paul was in the lead by huge margins and the red faced anchors always came up with some excuse as to why their own poll results were wrong. Just look at YouTube - it's full of clips that show the media's (both sides, not just FOX) intentional silencing of the Paul campaign.
Anyone who doesn't support Paul does not support the very foundation of our country - The Constitution of the United States of America. Period.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: Joe Joe]
#14013566 - 02/23/11 01:29 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Joe Joe said: No, we don't. Why don't you provide some links?
I'm not talking to you. I'm talking to the supposed expert. For you I will recommend Google. It is a wonderfully useful tool for education. Avail yourself at your leisure.
--------------------
|
Joe Joe
2nd Level Meditator


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 190
Loc: Vortex #4
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod] 1
#14013610 - 02/23/11 01:36 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, that's what I thought. You didn't give him any links either. Loser.
|
ScavengerType


Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 5,784
Loc: The North
Last seen: 10 years, 6 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: Joe Joe]
#14013654 - 02/23/11 01:42 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Joe Joe said: Anyone who doesn't support Paul does not support the very foundation of our country - The Constitution of the United States of America. Period.
I wouldn't say that, but there is no doubt that Paul is a better candidate than most all that are run for a spot on the republican ticket.
I know fox has had a long history of having different poll results than other news agencies. I'd prefer to see proof of others before I believe that they are all doing it.
-------------------- "Have you ever seen what happens when a grenade goes off in a school? Do you really know what you’re doing when you order shock and awe? Are you prepared to kneel beside a dying soldier and tell him why he went to Iraq, or why he went to any war?" "The things that are done in the name of the shareholder are, to me, as terrifying as the things that are done—dare I say it—in the name of God. Montesquieu said, "There have never been so many civil wars as in the Kingdom of God." And I begin to feel that’s true. The shareholder is the excuse for everything." - Author and former M6/M5 agent John le Carré on Democracy Now. Conquer's Club
|
Joe Joe
2nd Level Meditator


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 190
Loc: Vortex #4
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: ScavengerType]
#14013739 - 02/23/11 01:53 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Just look at YouTube. There are plenty of clips archived there that show multiple news agencies doing the same thing to the Paul campaign in 2008.
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: Joe Joe]
#14013902 - 02/23/11 02:14 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Nobody gives a shit about nobody Ron Paul. I'd vote for Obama before I'd vote for either that cunt or Huckabee.
I have no intention with supplying the so-called expert on environmental issues with links. You lazy children need to do a little work for yourselves. Or not. You can stay stupid.
--------------------
|
Tri High
Whigro


Registered: 05/02/08
Posts: 11,769
Loc: Monaghan, Ireland
Last seen: 12 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14014085 - 02/23/11 02:39 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Huckabee is a religious nutbag.
Fuck that guy.
I went to a city hall meeting recently and they said a prayer before starting.
How is that supposed to work? Separation of state and church? But my city council (mayor included) are all praying before doing state-centered business?
What the fuck gives?
-------------------- you just need money to get laid - starfire_xes
|
Joe Joe
2nd Level Meditator


Registered: 10/29/10
Posts: 190
Loc: Vortex #4
Last seen: 12 years, 10 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14014597 - 02/23/11 03:45 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Nobody gives a shit about nobody Ron Paul. I'd vote for Obama before I'd vote for either that cunt or Huckabee.
Sans the media censorship last year you would be very wrong in your assessment.
Best fundraiser last year? Ron Paul. And he did it with private online donations. The most money ever raised in one day. The pundits were at a total loss to explain how this was possible. Also, as previously noted, they refuted their own polls when Paul was the standout favorite.
Paul supporters are the most enthusiastic and active. We are young and we are the future. Doesn't matter how much you deny it old man. I don't know if Ron will ever be president, but mark my words - Rand will be. When it happens I will remind you of this conversation. Assuming your old ass is still around and kickin.
Edited by Joe Joe (02/23/11 03:46 PM)
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14016993 - 02/23/11 10:35 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said:
Quote:
AlphaFalfa said:
Zappa does make heavy claims with little research to back it.
I made one claim. That GE crops increase yields. You provided me with the research that supports that although you lied about it and selectively quoted from it to create a false impression. Although I most certainly could have found many more articles I found it particularly gratifying to use your own petard on which to hoist you.
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
In May 2000, results of a two-year study by Nebraska University's Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources showed RR soya yielded 6% less than their closest non-GM relatives and 11% less than high-yielding non-GM varieties [2]. The yield penalty was attributed to the gene insertion process.
Similar yield drags have been reported since 1997.
* In 1997, the University of Purdue found that transgenic soya varieties yielded on average 12-20% less than unmodified varieties grown at the same locations [3]. * Research published in 1998 by the University of Arkansas and Cyanamid revealed reduced profit levels and lower yields for GM soya and cotton compared with unmodified varieties [3]. * The University of Wisconsin found GM soya yields from the 1998 harvest lower than non-modified varieties in over 80% of cases in trials across nine US states [4]. * In Iowa, a 1999 survey of reported an average RR-soybean yield reduction of 4% in over 365 fields [5]. * A review of 40 trials of soya varieties in the north central region of the US in 1999 found a mean 4% yield drag in RR soya [6]. * In the UK, reports of crop trials from the National Institute of Agricultural Botany show yields from GM winter oilseed rape and sugar beet 5-8% less than high-yielding conventional varieties [7].
In summary, yield losses, not yield gains, are more commonly associated with transgenic crops compared to best available conventionally-bred cultivars and hybrids [8].
[2] http://www.biotech-info.net/Roundup_soybeans_yield_less.html
[3] http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/gmlemmings.htm
[4] http://www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex/Documents/wisconsinRRsoyatrials98.htm
[5] http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/news/9-22-99gmorel.html
[6] [6]Oplinger, E.S., M.J. Martinka, and K.A. Schmitz (1999) Performance of transgenetic soybeans - Northern US, presented to the ASTA Meetings, Chicago, cited in [8].
[7]Reported in Farmers Weekly (UK), 4th December 1998.
[8] http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/faculty/eclark/10reasons.htm
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#14018755 - 02/24/11 08:37 AM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food
Quote:
A 1999 study by Charles Benbrook, Chief Scientist of the Organic Center, found that genetically engineered Roundup Ready soybeans did not increase yields.[45] The report reviewed over 8,200 university trials in 1998 and found that Roundup Ready soybeans had a yield drag of 5.3% across all varieties tested. In addition, the same study found that farmers used 2–5 times more herbicide (Roundup) on Roundup Ready soybeans compared to other popular weed management systems.[46]
However research published in Science in 2003 has shown that the use of genetically modified Bt cotton in India increased yields by 60% over the period 1998–2001 while the number of applications of insecticides against bollworm were three times less on average.[47]
A 2008 Soil Association report found that some scientific studies claimed that genetically modified varieties of plants do not produce higher crop yields than normal plants.[48]
In 2009 the Union of Concerned Scientists summarized numerous peer-reviewed studies on the yield contribution of genetic engineering in the United States. This report examined the two most widely grown engineered crops—soybeans and maize (corn).[49] Unlike many other studies, this work separated the yield contribution of the engineered gene from that of the many naturally occurring yield genes in crops.
The report found that engineered herbicide tolerant soy and maize did not increase yield at the national, aggregate level. Maize engineered with Bt insect resistance genes increased national yield by about 3 to 4 percent. Engineered crops increased net yield in all cases.
The study concluded that in the United States, other agricultural methods have made a much greater contribution to national crop yield increases in recent years than genetic engineering. United States Department of Agriculture data record maize yield increases of about 28 percent since engineered varieties were first commercialized in the mid 1990s. The yield contribution of engineered genes has therefore been a modest fraction—about 14 percent—of the maize yield increase since the mid 1990s.
A 2010 article summarised the results of 49 peer reviewed studies on GM crops worldwide.[50][51] On average, farmers in developed countries experienced increase in yield of 6% and in underdeveloped countries of 29%. Tillage was decreased by 25–58% on herbicide resistant soybeans, insecticide applications on Bt crops were reduced by 14–76% and 72% of farmers worldwide experienced positive economic results.
Did you know that soy beans aren't the only GM crop there is? It's true.
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
--------------------
|
Yrat
Hello

Registered: 11/08/07
Posts: 2,312
Last seen: 3 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14019852 - 02/24/11 12:54 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
take it to another thread ladies
-------------------- "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." -Henry David Thoreau Strike The Root
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14020185 - 02/24/11 02:08 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food
Quote:
A 1999 study by Charles Benbrook, Chief Scientist of the Organic Center, found that genetically engineered Roundup Ready soybeans did not increase yields.[45] The report reviewed over 8,200 university trials in 1998 and found that Roundup Ready soybeans had a yield drag of 5.3% across all varieties tested. In addition, the same study found that farmers used 2–5 times more herbicide (Roundup) on Roundup Ready soybeans compared to other popular weed management systems.[46]
However research published in Science in 2003 has shown that the use of genetically modified Bt cotton in India increased yields by 60% over the period 1998–2001 while the number of applications of insecticides against bollworm were three times less on average.[47]
A 2008 Soil Association report found that some scientific studies claimed that genetically modified varieties of plants do not produce higher crop yields than normal plants.[48]
In 2009 the Union of Concerned Scientists summarized numerous peer-reviewed studies on the yield contribution of genetic engineering in the United States. This report examined the two most widely grown engineered crops—soybeans and maize (corn).[49] Unlike many other studies, this work separated the yield contribution of the engineered gene from that of the many naturally occurring yield genes in crops.
The report found that engineered herbicide tolerant soy and maize did not increase yield at the national, aggregate level. Maize engineered with Bt insect resistance genes increased national yield by about 3 to 4 percent. Engineered crops increased net yield in all cases.
The study concluded that in the United States, other agricultural methods have made a much greater contribution to national crop yield increases in recent years than genetic engineering. United States Department of Agriculture data record maize yield increases of about 28 percent since engineered varieties were first commercialized in the mid 1990s. The yield contribution of engineered genes has therefore been a modest fraction—about 14 percent—of the maize yield increase since the mid 1990s.
A 2010 article summarised the results of 49 peer reviewed studies on GM crops worldwide.[50][51] On average, farmers in developed countries experienced increase in yield of 6% and in underdeveloped countries of 29%. Tillage was decreased by 25–58% on herbicide resistant soybeans, insecticide applications on Bt crops were reduced by 14–76% and 72% of farmers worldwide experienced positive economic results.
Quote:
Did you know that soy beans aren't the only GM crop there is? It's true.
You oughta retract your statement then because obviously saying that GM crops increase yields is clearly not true. Also, I never said that all GM crops were not capable of producing more yields!!! I said that the statement GM crops product more yields in simply incorrect!!! BASIC ARGUMENTATION ZAPPA.
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#14020211 - 02/24/11 02:12 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
You also do know that the majority of the studies done on GM crops are funded by Monsanto themselves right?
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#14020216 - 02/24/11 02:12 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Are you fucking joking? GM crops do increase yields. The only exception to that you produced was for soy beans. In every other case I know of GM crops increase yields. I didn't get specific. I was deliberately general. You on the other got general by saying, generally they don't increase yields, when all you had was a single crop. Basic argumentation, child. English. Learn it
Quote:
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
--------------------
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14021087 - 02/24/11 05:09 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: Are you fucking joking? GM crops do increase yields. The only exception to that you produced was for soy beans. In every other case I know of GM crops increase yields. I didn't get specific. I was deliberately general. You on the other got general by saying, generally they don't increase yields, when all you had was a single crop. Basic argumentation, child. English. Learn it
Quote:
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
Don't get me started on the fucking environment boss, you will be begging me to stop by the end of it.
English???? English?????
Are you fucking out of your mind?????
You don't mention that you so happen to be talking generally about GM crops after you already make such a claim, then gnarl at people for not knowing this.
My question is, why didn't you just say; generally GM crops have higher yields. Instead of GM crops have higher yields?
Am I suppose to presuppose that you are speaking generally about this without you making mention of it?
Is this what you think BASIC ENGLISH IS?


Grain yield of initial Bt corn hybrid introductions to farmers in the Northern Corn Belt Auteur(s) / Author(s) LAUER J. (1) ; WEDBERG J. (2) ; Affiliation(s) du ou des auteurs / Author(s) Affiliation(s) (1) Dep. of Agronomy, 1575 Linden Dr., Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, ETATS-UNIS (2) 337 Russell Labs, 1630 Linden Dr., Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, ETATS-UNIS Résumé / Abstract European corn borer (ECB; Ostrinia nubilalis Hubner), is a major pest of corn (Zea mays L.) in North America. Recently, seed companies have begun to offer control of this pest by introducing synthetic genes derived from Bacillus thuringiensis spp. kurstaki (Bt) into the corn genome. Our objectives were to compare the yield of Bt hybrids with adapted high yielding non-Bt hybrids, and to evaluate Bt hybrid yield under economically significant ECB infestation. Experiments were established in the field at three locations in 1995 and one location during 1996. Three groups of corn hybrids were evaluated : transformed hybrids with the Bt gene, closely related isoline hybrids without the Bt gene, and standard high yielding hybrids adapted to these locations. ECB infestation treatments consisted of natural infestation, inoculation four times during the growing season, and insecticide application resulting in an ECB free treatment. Grain yield of Bt corn hybrids was not affected by ECB. Yield of isoline hybrids was 10% lower than both standard and Bt hybrids regardless of ECB treatment. Yield of Bt hybrids was 4 to 8% greater than standard hybrids when inoculated with ECB. However, yield of Bt hybrids was 8% less than standard hybrids when an insecticide was applied. Meld of initial Bt hybrid introductions was equivalent to or better than standard hybrids, except in environments with low ECB.
More indipendent researchers finding contradicting your findings....
Development, yield, grain moisture and nitrogen uptake of Bt corn hybrids and their conventional near-isolines
B.L. MaCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author and K.D. Subedi
Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre (ECORC), Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 960 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ont., Canada K1A 0C6 Received 11 May 2004; revised 28 September 2004; accepted 29 September 2004. Available online 6 November 2004.
Abstract
There are concerns over the economic benefits of corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids with the Bt trait transferred from Bacillus thuringiensis. A field experiment including three to seven pairs of commercial hybrids and their transgenic Bt near-isolines were grown side-by-side for three consecutive years in Ottawa, Canada (45°17′N, 75°45′W; 93 m above sea level) to determine (i) which hybrid had the highest yielding potential, (ii) if there was a differential response of Bt and non-Bt hybrids to N application, and (iii) under natural infestation of European corn borer (ECB), whether there was a yield advantage of Bt over non-Bt hybrids to justify their cost. We found that some of the Bt hybrids took 2–3 additional days to reach silking and maturity, and produced a similar or up to 12% lower grain yields with 3–5% higher grain moisture at maturity, in comparison with their non-Bt counterpart. Although N application increased grain yield and N uptake in 2 of the 3 years, there was no N-by-hybrid interaction on yield or other agronomic traits. Most Bt hybrids had similar to or lower total N content in grain with higher N in stover than their respective non-Bt near-isolines. Under extreme weather conditions (e.g. cool air temperature at planting and severe drought during the development), some of the hybrids (both Bt and non-Bt) required up to 400 additional crop heat units (CHU) to reach physiological maturity than indicated by the supplying companies. Our data suggest that within the same maturity group, it was the superior hybrids (non-Bt trait) that led to the greatest N accumulation, and the highest grain yield. Under the conditions tested, there was no yield advantage of Bt hybrids in comparison with their conventional counterparts when stalk lodging and breakage of the non-Bt counterpart by ECB was low to moderate.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T6M-4DRBBYB-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F14%2F2005&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1655272988&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=072506cde1e7800d8429c16e6b60fb38&searchtype=a
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
zappaisgod
horrid asshole


Registered: 02/11/04
Posts: 81,741
Loc: Fractallife's gym
Last seen: 7 years, 11 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: AlphaFalfa]
#14021148 - 02/24/11 05:19 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
It never fucking ends with you. One sentence
Quote:
There are concerns over the economic benefits of corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids with the Bt trait transferred from Bacillus thuringiensis.
Could you even invent a more restrictive qualifier. Other GM maize has higher yields. One aint so good. Wow. Stop. No wait. Don't stop. Answer these first:
Quote:
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?
--------------------
|
AlphaFalfa
imagine


Registered: 06/16/08
Posts: 3,857
Loc: 3 Seconds Ago.
Last seen: 10 years, 2 months
|
Re: FOX news deceptively edits video from 2011 CPAC [Re: zappaisgod]
#14021482 - 02/24/11 06:08 PM (13 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zappaisgod said: It never fucking ends with you. One sentence
Quote:
There are concerns over the economic benefits of corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids with the Bt trait transferred from Bacillus thuringiensis.
Could you even invent a more restrictive qualifier. Other GM maize has higher yields. One aint so good. Wow. Stop. No wait. Don't stop. Answer these first:
Quote:
Now to other points you ignore
1. Do you know who Paul Ehrlich is? 2. How many millions of little brown people have died from malaria because of Rachel Carson? 3. How do you feel about the delta smelt? 4. Do you know what happens to water after it is used to irrigate crops?

You really have no ability to read do you?
Quote:
European corn borer (ECB; Ostrinia nubilalis Hubner), is a major pest of corn (Zea mays L.)
This is from the study that you site as a reason to keep GMO's! The ones that say that they have 4-8% higher yields!!
The idiocy never ends does it?
Oh and from the same study, EXACTLY WHAT THE USDA SAiD!!!!
Quote:
However, yield of Bt hybrids was 8% less than standard hybrids when an insecticide was applied
WOW, so first you ask me to think i am a child because i don't know basic engish, on account that you didn't make clear that what you meant was GMO's 'in general' and now you obviously have showed that you have no fucking tail where you ass is.
-------------------- if you ever feel lost, just remember, life is not a journey, it is entertainment, all 4 fun...
|
|