It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by chiefsmom
Thanks for posting this.
The more countries I read about stopping them, the more hope I have that our own country may wake up and stand up.
AFP - France's top administrative court on Monday overturned a government order banning French farmers from planting genetically modified crops from the US agriculture giant Monsanto.
France's agriculture ministry imposed a ban in February 2008 amid concerns over public safety, but its decision had already been called into question by the European Court and has now been annulled by the State Council.
The State Council's ruling stated that the government has failed to prove that Monsanto crops "present a particularly elevated level of risk to either human health or the environment."
In September, the European Court of Justice ordered France to review its ban. Since then, the Council ruled, the French government has failed to present new evidence of the supposed dangers posed by the plants.
Noting that while food production tends to increase arithmetically, population tends to increase naturally at a (faster) geometric rate, Malthus argued that it is no surprise that people thus choose to reduce (or “check”) population growth. People can increase food production, Malthus thought, only by slow, difficult methods such as reclaiming unused land or intensive farming; but they can check population growth more effectively by marrying late, using contraceptives, emigrating, or, in more extreme circumstances, resorting to reduced health care, tolerating vicious social diseases or impoverished living conditions, warfare, or even infanticide. Malthus was fascinated not with the inevitability of human demise, but with why humans do not die off in the face of such overwhelming odds. As an economist, he studied responses to incentives.
Malthus is arguably the most misunderstood and misrepresented economist of all time. The adjective “Malthusian” is used today to describe a pessimistic prediction of the lock-step demise of a humanity doomed to starvation via overpopulation. When his hypothesis was first stated in his best-selling An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), the uproar it caused among noneconomists overshadowed the instant respect it inspired among his fellow economists. So irrefutable and simple was his illustrative side-by-side comparison of an arithmetic and a geometric series—food increases more slowly than population—that it was often taken out of context and highlighted as his main observation....
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Swills
Yes, the OP link has various links. Including a story explaining exactly what you posted. Not to sound rude, but you obviously didn't read it.
Here, read this post from page one that you must have missed as well.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
This is definitely a victory. Perhaps a small victory, but a victory nonetheless.edit on 5-12-2011 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Skewed
Legal or illegal who gives a crap. If the people do not want something then leave it at that.
Originally posted by JustSlowlyBackAway
Originally posted by chiefsmom
Thanks for posting this.
The more countries I read about stopping them, the more hope I have that our own country may wake up and stand up.
Americans would wake up if they had the information. But as of now, labeling of produce or products that contain GMOs is prohibited. Yes. Against the law.
Monsanto feels, rightly, that labeling this crap would be like putting a skull and crossbones on it. Their quote.
So, we are forced by our crooked lawmakers in bed with agrobusiness to be kept in the dark and eat their poison.
Isn't that special?