Comment Re:Latency (Score 1) 261
I so wish I had mod points. 5: Funny.
I so wish I had mod points. 5: Funny.
If you check your own source, it states: "monsoons leading to a series of droughts, lack of better prices, exploitation by Middlemen, all of which have led to a series of suicides committed by farmers across India." If the droughts were the main cause then prices would go up from lack of supply. Since prices are falling, the pricing problem is largely for other reasons, including middlemen like Monsanto.
It seems you read the Wikipedia article but not the references, or the report I linked to. Droughts were not the only cause, but the major one. Read the report. Even if middlemen were a factor, they are not necessary or sufficient to explain the situation, and Monsanto are not middlemen, they are the ultimate supplier.
Again, if you check your own source, the WHO data is irrelevant since it's for all of India, not just farmers. If you check your Wikipedia source, this states that farmer suicides are increasing.
The previous poster said "farmer suicide is now the #2 killer in India". I provided the data which demonstrates this to be false. Farmer suicides have been increasing, but that doesn't mean you can lie about the magnitude.
You would do well to take your own advice; but then apologists rarely do.
I'm not an apologist, just a reasonable person who thinks knee-jerking against corporations is stupid. And my post was reacting to cpu6502 posting completely false statements in support of his fallacious point. Your sources are not reliable, they are activist sites with a very blatant agenda and no evidence-based reasoning.
No, that's what I said. You initially said it was sold. Then you took that bit back and said Monsanto have been active proponants [sic] of it. That's the part I wanted evidence of - they haven't been proponents of it at all. They just bought a company who had originally developed the technology (in partnership with the USDA), immediately stopped the development of it, and publicly stated that they would never use it.
If you can produce evidence of that, please do. Otherwise, stop talking out of your colon.
Got any references to support your claim that glyphosate resistance has been bred into crops using conventional breeding? I don't believe it (and I'm a seed biologist).
No, they don't have them. The technology was under development, then development was halted and Monsanto pledged never to bring it to market. There was not UN moratorium, and the UN did not even discuss the issue until 2006 at the CBD, 7 years after Monsanto's pledge.
I agree that people (i.e. you) are confused, but it's because they don't bother to look things up, not because of Monsanto.
This is nonsense. Terminator technology is not used by any company, anywhere in the world.
The technology is not even ready for market yet!
Previous poster was right, get your facts straight.
If Monsanto sold sterile seed (which they don't) how would farmers fields become contaminated? Moron.
It would be a crime against humanity, if it were true, and if farmers were forced to use Monsanto seeds.
In fact, Monsanto do not make sterile seeds.
In fact, farmers buy Monsanto seeds because they think they generate the best return on their investment.
In fact, almost all non-GM seed sold in the world is only good for the first generation and has to be re-bought each year because the highest yielding non-GM crops are first generation hybrids which don't retain their vigorous characteristics in the second generation.
And your point about the free market makes no sense in this context. If Monsanto did sell sterile seeds, farmers wouldn't buy them (unless they were worth it), and the market would either force them to stop selling sterile seeds or go out of business.
This is one of the most misinformed comments I have ever seen on
You clearly have no knowledge whatsoever about the Indian farmer suicide problem, which began years before Monsanto started selling GM seed in India, and is absolutely nothing to do with the company. The suicides are, according to most analyses I've seen, usually linked closely with widespread crop failures which follow monsoon drought seasons. It's a climate problem, not a Monsanto problem.
And farmer suicide being the #2 killer in India? That's so stupid it hurts to read. If you check the WHO mortality data, you'll find non-communicable diseases and infectious diseases account for 9/10 of the top ten causes of death, with accidental injury being the 10th.
Finally, patents do last for 20 years in the USA! Not 100 years.
Please, in future, try not to comment until you have the slightest clue what you're talking about.
That's not what happened at all. They didn't force her to take down her website, they just told her she couldn't bring her camera to school. Still a stupid move, but not the same as what you are alleging.
I didn't say anything about democracy, just that creationists are not the sensible fraction. But since you mention it, the USA isn't a direct democracy; it doesn't necessarily have to enact the majority opinion on everything.
Yes, because the 21% are the sensible ones.
That doesn't tell you much about the demographics involved.
Those 1,024 adults could have been somewhat self-selected. What kind of person answers the telephone without first confirming who the call is from, then proceeds to answer a bunch of inane questions? A person stupid enough to believe in creationism, that's who.
You're confusing evolution with natural selection. Natural selection is just one mechanism by which evolution can occur.
I tell them to turn to the study of mathematics, for it is only there that they might escape the lusts of the flesh. -- Thomas Mann, "The Magic Mountain"
