GM

[Anna]

But surely, isn't the point about GM crops the fact that by embracing them (and bearing in mind that 30% of 'normal' crops are eaten/destroyed by insects before harvesting) we can feed the world in the face of ever dwindling resources? I think it's said close on a billion are near to starvation? So, the choice seems to be: drastically reduce population or grow GM to keep them alive?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

So a misnomer.

Shame eh?

Moral: don't use terms you don't understand or run the risk of looking stupid

Did you miss your point [3] then?
"and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer"
or don't you understand?

I'm looking for a term which describes someone on a blog page making excessive use of smileys . . . any suggestions (can't think why I ask . . .)?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

But surely, isn't the point about GM crops the fact that by embracing them (and bearing in mind that 30% of 'normal' crops are eaten/destroyed by insects before harvesting) we can feed the world in the face of ever dwindling resources? I think it's said close on a billion are near to starvation? So, the choice seems to be: drastically reduce population or grow GM to keep them alive?

Yes, that's about right. And in the process use less herbicides and fertiliser.

[Flay]

Well said Anna That's just the point. GM could increase yields, and reduce the need for insecticides, pumping with hormones and excessive fertilisation.

[amateur51]

Did you miss your point [3] then?
"and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer"
or don't you understand?

Never mind the clever answers - what are you trying to say?

[Flosshilde]

But they don't reduce the need for insecticides - they are insecticide-proof, so more insecticides can be used on them, and they are tied in to the manufacturer's insecticides, so that the grower has no choice (see the comment above on Monsanto turning to the production of GM crops because they were losing the premium for producing Roundup).

As for needing to produce more food to feed a growing world population, there is some truth in that, but one of the (possibly more relevant) issues is climate change. GM crops are being produced to be more drought-resistant, or salt-resistant. I believe that it is more important to deal with the causes of climate change & the desertification that results from that (& other human activities). At the moment we are creating a problem & then producing a solution that will, in all probablility, cause other problems (as happened when plants or animals were introduced into environments where they had no natural predators). We don't seem to be terribly good at learning lessons about 'meddling with nature', do we?

[An_Inspector_Calls]

There's another description here:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sock+puppet

I rather like variant 3 - applies well in your case.

Clearly things have come to a sorry pass with our education system when people can't even understand the simplest of insults.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

But they don't reduce the need for insecticides - they are insecticide-proof, so more insecticides can be used on them, and they are tied in to the manufacturer's insecticides, so that the grower has no choice (see the comment above on Monsanto turning to the production of GM crops because they were losing the premium for producing Roundup).

As for needing to produce more food to feed a growing world population, there is some truth in that, but one of the (possibly more relevant) issues is climate change. GM crops are being produced to be more drought-resistant, or salt-resistant. I believe that it is more important to deal with the causes of climate change & the desertification that results from that (& other human activities). At the moment we are creating a problem & then producing a solution that will, in all probablility, cause other problems (as happened when plants or animals were introduced into environments where they had no natural predators). We don't seem to be terribly good at learning lessons about 'meddling with nature', do we?

No. the objective is remove the need for all insecticides and rely on the gentically modified resistance of the plant to insects.
Removing the causes of climate change might be possible if we were certain as to exactly what they were.
As for meddling with nature, I rather subscribe to Lomborg's views expressed in the Skeptical Environmetalist.

[amateur51]

There's another description here:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sock+puppet

I rather like variant 3 - applies well in your case.

Clearly things have come to a sorry pass with our education system when people can't even understand the simplest of insults.

The reason I haven't understood it in the way that you describe is that you have only just revealed it.

I'm certain that my basic education was every bit as good as yours and at least I can express myself in a straightforward manner, rather than hiding behind varying definitions of a neologism.

[Anna]

No. the objective is remove the need for all insecticides and rely on the gentically modified resistance of the plant to insects.

That was my understanding of it, but I'm not a scientist. All for climate change, we're too far along the path and it's impossible to reverse the process. It's all our own fault, so let's live with the damage we've done to the planet through greed and exploitation and seek alternative solutions, of which GM is the main contender for feeding the over-populated planet. Edit: Or else do a King Herod

[Flosshilde]

Clearly things have come to a sorry pass with our education system when people can't even understand the simplest of insults.

I think am might be rather flattered if you think that he is a recent 'product' of our education system.

[Bryn]

There does seem to be a Monsanto sock-puppet posing on this thread.

[Anna]

There does seem to be a Monsanto sock-puppet posing on this thread.

Would I get banned if I suggested genetically modifying some posters' testosterone?
Edit: I should delete this but honestly guys, sometimes, you slugging it out, well, it's, OK, it's you being males <sigh> ad infinitum

[Bryn]

That was my understanding of it, but I'm not a scientist. All for climate change, we're too far along the path and it's impossible to reverse the process. It's all our own fault, so let's live with the damage we've done to the planet through greed and exploitation and seek alternative solutions, of which GM is the main contender for feeding the over-populated planet. Edit: Or else do a King Herod

Currently, huge quantities of food are wasted, especially in the developed world.

The claimed objective of removing "the need for all insecticides and rely on the gentically modified resistance of the plant to insects" appears very laudable. However, that does not seem to be the true objective of the likes of Monsanto. There certainly are researchers working to that objective, but it's profit which drives the agribusiness giants, not altruism.

[amateur51]

I think am might be rather flattered if you think that he is a recent 'product' of our education system.

Cheers Flossie - I think