Stunning Corn Comparison: GMO versus NON GMO

Originally posted by boymonkey74
Considering all corn has been genetically modified since we started planting it, as long as it is tested I see no problem with it.

Hybridized and genetically modified are two completely different animals. Hybrids are combinations of two different varieties for the specific purpose of producing a variety with the positive attributes of both parent varieties. Genetically modifieds are combinations of corn and something completely different in order, in one example, to kill the animal that consumes it. Specifically earworms. Let's hope earworms and humans don't suffer the same fate.

reply to post by wirefly


Wow thanks you are about the 7th person to say that...read the thread eh?

This is begining to feel like that movie children of men. What if women suddenly could not produce children? That would be the end of our very existence. I'm so pissed I can't even find the words.

reply to post by boymonkey74

Nope. Not going to read 7 pages to scan for that.

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by Blarneystoner

 

The simple fact that corn that we usually buy in the store today wouldn't exist if it wasn't for man creating it. Feel free to disupte that fact if you'd like.

There is a huge difference between domestication and genetic modification. If you don't understand that then there's no point in discussing it with you

reply to post by Hopechest


Ever heard of the slow silent killers? How long do you think we've been producing GMO's? How do you know that the diseases people get today, haven't been caused by damage from these pervasive toxins? You don't.

reply to post by Kody27


Calcium isn't responsible for calcification; lack of Vitamin K2 and D3 is. Possibly even a deficiency of boron causing the parathyroid to release too much of its hormone, which in turn causes the bones to release their calcium.

Come-on people we need to impeach this bastard now and that's just the start.I am physically sick from the air and the food and the water and so are millions of you and not by accident we need to save our grandchildren from these sons of bitches.cancer is an epidemic.allergic disorders.you name the decease its becoming an epidemic and not by accjident this is being done to us.We need to get this stopped.

reply to post by colbyforce


Yes me to (ditto) WTF Sattoro and Monsatin need to go.

What I find funny is that put Heirloom corn and Gmo corn in front of the average person not a single person can tell the difference between them.

Not a single one

reply to post by neo96

What I find funny is that put Heirloom corn and Gmo corn in front of the average person not a single person can tell the difference between them.

Not a single one

So what?

You can put a tungsten filled gold plated bar next to a pure gold bar and no one can tell the difference either. The differences are measured through a series of tests.

And to be fair, farmers who used to use heirloom seeds then switched to GMO have noticed the difference in their product with the naked eye. But once again, it's the scientific tests that define the real differences...no one can see DNA, other microscopic genetic indicators, and nutritional content just by sight.

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

So what?

Such an awesome response

And to be fair, farmers who used to use heirloom seeds then switched to GMO have noticed the difference in their product with the naked eye

Yeah farmers not the average person.

Actually sight has always been used in the determination of the consumption of food has been for centuries.

reply to post by neo96

Actually sight has always been used in the determination of the consumption of food has been for centuries.

By people who were trained to do so; did you take many classes in school revolving around the discernment of nutritional value via eyesight as a child?

reply to post by VeritasAequitas


No spent 20 years on a farm think I am qualified.

reply to post by neo96

Actually sight has always been used in the determination of the consumption of food has been for centuries.

So they have been determining the genetics and nutritional content of produce strictly by sight?

To the best of my knowledge we were not capable to determine these things until recent advancements in modern science. Don't sit there and tell me that farmers have been able to determine the exact DNA and nutritional content for centuries. I would like to see you back up that claim, if that's even what you meant.

Neon, please tell us what you meant...thanks

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

So they have been determining the genetics and nutritional content of produce strictly by sight?

Well in a way yes, most people just read a thread on ATS or read an article somewhere else that says GMO is bad.

To the best of my knowledge we were not capable to determine these things until recent advancements in modern science

As stated far too many people don't even use science to make that determination as stated above.

reply to post by neo96

Well in a way yes

In which way?

most people just read a thread on ATS or read an article somewhere else that says GMO is bad.

That is an assumption on your behalf with nothing to back it up, another baseless claim from you. Personally, years of research have proven without a doubt that GMO is bad...your off topic deflection disguised in the form of an ad-hom attack was irrelevant and. This assumption of yours has nothing to do with what I have asked you.

As stated far too many people don't even use science to make that determination as stated above.

Irrelevant, once again...

My point was that these factors CANNOT be determined unless scientific testing is involved and that this testing has not been around for "centuries" as you have implied. Which still leaves all my orignal questions unanswered... again.

Just in case you missed it, as you seem to have purposely ignored the important parts of my responses to your posts, I will link you.

Here... www.abovetopsecret.com...

And here... www.abovetopsecret.com...

You can side step all you want but I will ask you over and over until you respond to my actual questions instead of responding to stuff I never even said.

Are you accidentally posting in the wrong thread again?

reply to post by Corruption Exposed

In which way?

Don't people use their eyes to read?

That is an assumption on your behalf with nothing to back it up, another baseless claim from you. Personally, years of research have proven without a doubt that GMO is bad...your off topic deflection disguised in the form of an ad-hom attack was irrelevant and. This assumption of yours has nothing to do with what I have asked you.

No assumption this entire thread backs it up as every other thread "years of research gmo is bad" eh

Take a gander here:



From 1860- to 1950 would be non Gmo years notice the yields, then ponder what was the population during that time period.

Then take a look after 1950 and the rise of yield, and the corresponding population growth then figure in profit margins of farmers increased with that yield, and people are living longer seems to me gmo consumption was bad people would be dropping like flies,.

Offtopic eh whatever.as "you" is "offtopic" and "irrelevant"

Originally posted by boymonkey74
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Not licking arse or out but when I need something verifying Phage is the man to ask....not saying he is always right but it is dam close.
Oh and I don't know what you are talking about so can you explain it to me please?

edit on 27-3-2013 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)

what i'm reffering to is monsanto's dark history and why would anyone defend such a company with a proven track record of hurting people, neglect, one of the leaders in environmental pollution, i could go on but here is a little history on monsanto, you tell me if you should trust them or not.

Headquartered near St. Louis, Missouri, the Monsanto Chemical Company was founded in 1901. Monsanto became a leading manufacturer of sulfuric acid and other industrial chemicals in the 1920s. In the 1930s, Monsanto began producing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). PCBs, widely used as lubricants, hydraulic fluids, cutting oils, waterproof coatings and liquid sealants, are potent carcinogens and have been implicated in reproductive, developmental and immune system disorders.

By the 1940s, Monsanto had begun focusing on plastics and synthetic fabrics like polystyrene (still widely used in food packaging and other consumer products), which is ranked fifth in the EPA’s 1980s listing of chemicals whose production generates the most total hazardous waste.

Monsanto has been repeatedly fined and ruled against for, among many things, mislabeling containers of Roundup, failing to report health data to EPA, and chemical spills and improper chemical deposition. In 1995, Monsanto ranked fifth among U.S. corporations in EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory, having discharged 37 million pounds of toxic chemicals into the air, land, water and underground.

In August, 2003, Monsanto and its former chemical subsidiary, Solutia, Inc. (now owned by Pharmacia Corp.), agreed to pay $600 million to settle claims brought by more than 20,000 residents of Anniston, AL, over the severe contamination of ground and water by tons of PCBs dumped in the area from the 1930s until the 1970s. Court documents revealed that Monsanto was aware of the contamination decades earlier.

Monsanto Watch

i don't know about you, but when a company with a history like this slides a civil suit protection clause into a House Bill and it is signed, i start worrying a lot.

i have to laugh at anyone who tries to back up these scum bags and be crazy enough to believe a word they say. i have been in the pesticide industry for 25 years and i can promise you they aren't out to make friends or be environmentally responsible, just look at their history.

reply to post by Hopechest


"Corn, as we know it today, is not natural I'm afraid"


Hahahahaha i hope you see the irony in this?

You're right, it no longer is natural and you defend the people who you can thank for it. Pure comedy this.


Nobody has the right to # up my food, no matter how many they spend on lobbying. But you make sure to keep eating that gmo food, looks like its already working on you and the other people who dont have issues with it.