GMO and Population Control- 'THE' Conspiracy

Allow yourself to consider this conundrum-

1- GMO companies, operating through organisations such as AGRA, seek to 'help' nations feed themselves. Millions starve in Africa every year and through AGRA, they seek to change this so no one starves and everyone has access to food. A noble plan it seems-



At the same time, we have a contradiction. A pretty large contradiction. If no one in Africa starves and AGRA helps everyone in Africa get food, then the population would increase at an even greater rate than it already is. I would assume this is basic logic as less people starving to death would mean more people to reproduce, hence and even greater increase in population levels.

2- AGRA is supported by the Rockerfeller Foundation and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

David Rockerfeller-

The negative effect of population growth on all of our planetery ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident...

Bill Gates-



So we have two major 'philanthropic' foundations who openly discuss their concerns over population growth and how it needs to be managed. Now this isn't a debate on whether improving economic welfare and eliminating disease has an impact on population (that's another thread), the point is both foundations are working to help reduce the projected population of the world in the coming years.

Yet both Rockerfeller and Bill Gates Foundations are supporting AGRA and the use of GMO in Africa. GMO through AGRA is being used to help feed the every increasing African populations. YET those behind GMO are at the same time working to keep population control in check

So we have a major contradiction here when looking on the surface.

What if GMO is actually part of the population control program?

Monsanto have already developed 'terminator' technology, crops that produce sterile seeds. What is stopping the population control folks from putting genes into their GMO products to sterilise humans? The elite don't look at a world full of human beings, they see a world full of exploitable numbers, they don't think twice of sacrificing human life to fulfill their plans and if it fits an agenda.

So, is AGRA and GMO in Africa to help feed the increasing population in Africa or part of the population control program, hiding in plain sight as a philanthropic organisation?

Since GMO leads to infertility in animals, a few generations we should have significantly reduced population. Why not test on Africa just like we are testing on US populations?

Europe has banned GMO. Perhaps they will here to inherit what is left. Switzerland, Germany... who are the masters?

Well presented. S&F. What better way to control your "cattle" than food and water modification...

reply to post by GoldenVoyager

Since GMO leads to infertility in animals,

I suppose there is some evidence of this?

Europe has banned GMO.

No it hasn't.
ec.europa.eu...

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by GoldenVoyager

 

Since GMO leads to infertility in animals,

I suppose there is some evidence of this?

Europe has banned GMO.

No it hasn't.
ec.europa.eu...

Phage, explain to me why two of the largest philanthropic foundations in the world that support population control (for good or bad is irrelevant to the question) would also support AGRA which would, if succesful help maintain an ever increasing population?

The two ideas are a complete contradiction it would seem...

reply to post by Wonderer2012

If no one in Africa starves and AGRA helps everyone in Africa get food, then the population would increase at an even greater rate than it already is.

Really? You just want to let 'em go ahead and starve? But have you by any chance compared population growth rates in countries which don't really have problems with famine to those which do? Famine is not a very good way of influencing population growth but it is pretty good at creating misery.
www.straight.com...

Do you think that reducing the rate of population growth is a bad thing? Do you think that the rate of growth is sustainable, particularly in regions like rural Africa?

Do you think that providing food to that growing population is a bad thing? Do you think that making sure that a growing population is fed is wrong?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

If no one in Africa starves and AGRA helps everyone in Africa get food, then the population would increase at an even greater rate than it already is.

Really? You just want to let 'em go ahead and starve? But have you by any chance compared population growth rates in countries which don't really have problems with famine to those which do? Famine is not a very good way of influencing population growth but it is pretty good at creating misery.
www.straight.com...

Do you think that reducing the rate of population growth is a bad thing? Do you think that the rate of growth is sustainable, particularly in regions like rural Africa?

Do you think that providing food to that growing population is a bad thing? Do you think that making sure that a growing population is fed is wrong?

edit on 6/21/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

As I said, whether managing population control is good or bad is not important to the question I am asking. AGRA, if successful, would help maintain Africa's growing population, that is in fact, one of the official reasons for its creation.

So why are major foundations that support population reduction (Rockerfeller and Bill Gates) in support of GMO in Africa that is officially being promoted to help sustain the growing population?

Seen as though you think GMO is 99.999% safe and not a conspiracy, please answer this question with what you think the answer is.

My take is AGRA is in fact part of the population control agenda (through forced sterilisation in the crops) but that is just a 'conspiracy', seen as you do not believe the conspiracy, what is the logical answer to my question?

reply to post by Wonderer2012

AGRA, if successful, would help maintain Africa's growing population, that is in fact, one of the official reasons for its creation.

Please point out where in AGRA mission statement it is stated that maintaining current levels of population growth is a goal.

So why are major foundations that support population reduction

Because unsustainable population growth creates human misery.

Seen as though you think GMO is 99.999% safe and not a conspiracy, please answer this question with what you think the answer is.

You have asked two separate questions for which there are two separate answers. I have answered them both.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

AGRA, if successful, would help maintain Africa's growing population, that is in fact, one of the official reasons for its creation.

Please point out where in AGRA mission statement it is stated that maintaining current levels of population growth is a goal.

So why are major foundations that support population reduction

Because unsustainable population growth creates human misery.

Seen as though you think GMO is 99.999% safe and not a conspiracy, please answer this question with what you think the answer is.

You have asked two separate questions for which there are two separate answers. I have answered them both.

edit on 6/21/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

No, you actually quoted me and cut the quote off half way through a sentence to take what I asked out of context

AGRA is being used to help sustain Africa and help them feed themselves. The population in Africa is continuously growing. By preventing millions starving to death each year, there will be more people to reproduce, hence AGRA is sustaining the increase in population.

At the same time, those behind AGRA support population reduction.

That is what I am presenting, without taking a conspiracy approach, please explain this seemingly contradictory stance of Rockerfeller and Bill Gates Foundations.

reply to post by Wonderer2012

That is what I am presenting, without taking a conspiracy approach, please explain this seemingly contradictory stance of Rockerfeller and Bill Gates Foundations.

The only contradiction is in your assumption that decreasing famine will increase population growth. It doesn't. You have cause and effect reversed. Unsustainable population growth results in worse famine but population keeps on growing.

The real answer (which everybody carefully avoids) is that they have had too many babies. Ethiopia’s population at the time of the last famine was 40 million. Twenty-five years later, it is 80 million. You can do everything else right—give your farmers new tools and skills, fight erosion, create food reserves—and if you don’t control the population, you are just spitting into the wind.

www.straight.com...

At the same time, those behind AGRA support population reduction.

No. You had it right the first time:

So we have two major 'philanthropic' foundations who openly discuss their concerns over population growth and how it needs to be managed.

By decreasing population growth rates and by increasing food supplies human misery is reduced.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

That is what I am presenting, without taking a conspiracy approach, please explain this seemingly contradictory stance of Rockerfeller and Bill Gates Foundations.

The only contradiction is in your assumption that decreasing famine will increase population growth. It doesn't. You have cause and effect reversed. Unsustainable population growth results in worse famine but population keeps on growing.

The real answer (which everybody carefully avoids) is that they have had too many babies. Ethiopia’s population at the time of the last famine was 40 million. Twenty-five years later, it is 80 million. You can do everything else right—give your farmers new tools and skills, fight erosion, create food reserves—and if you don’t control the population, you are just spitting into the wind.

www.straight.com...

 

At the same time, those behind AGRA support population reduction.

No. You had it right the first time:

So we have two major 'philanthropic' foundations who openly discuss their concerns over population growth and how it needs to be managed.

By decreasing population growth rates and by increasing food supplies human misery is reduced.

edit on 6/21/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

How does increasing food supplies or a nation's ability to grow enough food to feed everyone stop people having as many babies as they already do?

'We have enough food now, let's stop having kids?'

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I don't think he can really spell it out any clearer.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I don't think he can really spell it out any clearer.

HOW DOES INCREASING FOOD SUPPLIES OR PRODUCTION THROUGH AGRA (This is taking a leap of faith GMO is going to do that anyway) DECREASE POPULATION OR STOP POPULATION GROWTH?

He has avoided answering the question by breaking up my posts rather than quoting me properly.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Phage, explain to me why two of the largest philanthropic foundations in the world that support population control (for good or bad is irrelevant to the question) would also support AGRA which would, if succesful help maintain an ever increasing population?

The two ideas are a complete contradiction it would seem...

No.

The whole point of this project is to achieve a healthy and sustainable population. The people need food and birth control and immunisation. At the moment they're producing too many children and not enough food, while treatable diseases kill their children and weaken their adults.

By introducing birth control they will reduce their population growth to a sustainable level. By increasing their food production they will be able to support their population and eliminate malnutrition. By immunising they will improve the health of their population. The result is a healthy, sustainable population and a strong workforce.

Western nations have prospered by following this exact same model.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

I don't think he can really spell it out any clearer.

HOW DOES INCREASING FOOD SUPPLIES OR PRODUCTION THROUGH AGRA (This is taking a leap of faith GMO is going to do that anyway) DECREASE POPULATION OR STOP POPULATION GROWTH?

It doesn't.

You are confusing two separate ideas and completely missing the point because you're not a logical thinker and you don't even understand the simplest thing about agrarian societies.

reply to post by Wonderer2012

HOW DOES INCREASING FOOD SUPPLIES OR PRODUCTION THROUGH DECREASE POPULATION OR STOP POPULATION GROWTH?

I've answered you several times now. It doesn't. Nor does famine to any significant degree. But increasing local food production helps reduce human misery.

Ethiopia has had hunger problems for a long, long time. Look at how that has affected the population:

Originally posted by Sankari

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Phage, explain to me why two of the largest philanthropic foundations in the world that support population control (for good or bad is irrelevant to the question) would also support AGRA which would, if succesful help maintain an ever increasing population?

The two ideas are a complete contradiction it would seem...

No.

The whole point of this project is to achieve a healthy and sustainable population. The people need food and birth control and immunisation. At the moment they're producing too many children and not enough food, while treatable diseases kill their children and weaken their adults.

By introducing birth control they will reduce their population growth to a sustainable level. By increasing their food production they will be able to support their population and eliminate malnutrition. By immunising they will improve the health of their population. The result is a healthy, sustainable population and a strong workforce.

Western nations have prospered by following this exact same model.

So to clarify-

Rockerfeller and Bill Gates Foundations are the champions of humanity?

How great all this would be if Africa wasn't being ravaged by wars engineered by the west and their land plundered for centuries!!

reply to post by Wonderer2012

How great all this would be if Africa wasn't being ravaged by wars engineered by the west and their land plundered for centuries!!

Yeah. Well, we're learning. But you think Africa was all nice and cozy before it was exploited by colonial interests? No tribal wars? None of that kind of stuff? You think the ancient Egyptians were really nice guys?

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Wonderer2012

 

How great all this would be if Africa wasn't being ravaged by wars engineered by the west and their land plundered for centuries!!

Yeah. Well, we're learning. But you think Africa was all nice and cozy before it was exploited by colonial interests? No tribal wars? None of that kind of stuff?

Of course, but not to the extent the colonial interests have created. When we provide dictators with weapons to keep the people living in poverty (which is the real reason for there being no food and loads of disease through no sanitations etc) it kind of makes AGRA look like an uphill struggle.

Contrary to Sankari's opinion, I am a very logical thinker, I can understand both sides of the arguments VERY clearly. I like to challenge responses, that is why I am repeating my questions.

Nothing is truly black and white.

If you actually think about the debate here-

- If increasing food production through AGRA does not cause population levels to sustain their current increasing levels, then the SOLE purpose of AGRA is to prevent human suffering. That is going by the logic presented in opposition to my OP.

Hence, we have to believe that Rockerfeller and Bill Gates foundations are investing all this money for the sake of the African people, which is completely contrary to our outright evil policies regarding the continent of Africa over the last couple of centuries.

It is one hell of a leap of faith to actually believe this!