Slashdot Mirror

Came here to say this. By 2012, U.S. farmers were using no-till on over half of all acres planted to corn, soybean, and wheat.

Farming has moved so far beyond this article that I am not sure why it was even published.

Consider the source: a freshly-minted staff writer and an economics writer for the Christian Science Monitor. If they didn't know about it before, it must be news.

Cow Farts contribute tons of methane into the atmosphere. https://www.popsci.com/cow-far... The other side sez: https://www.agweb.com/article/...

On a related note, China needs US rice more than the US needs Chinese-assembled smartphones.

If all national borders became insurmountable barriers, the USA would be just fine (Alaska and Hawaii would be confused). A lot of other nations can take care of themselves, but the ones that currently train their labor to be intermediaries in a construction process would have a harder time adapting (by that I mean the ones that import food and raw materials, and export assembled products).

but what I do care about is the profiteering of it

That would be a reasonable criticism, if it were at all true that Monsanto goes around suing people willy-nilly. They don't. That's a myth fabricated by the anti-GMO movement to discredit genetic engineering via guilt by association. There is not a single case, not one, of Monsanto suing a farmer for being cross pollinated. Every single time, they knew damned well that they were violating the law. What you are doing would be like looking at a guy selling bootleg copies of Frozen and declaring that Disney made home videos illegal. It is dishonest and false.

Monsanto has achieved a monopoly status

Monopoly? Tell that to Syngenta, Dow, and Pioneer. This does not look like a monopoly to me.

by using the legal system to patent their modifications

They patent plants, so what? Breeders (aka the people ensuring you have an abundant and tasty food supply, you're welcome) been doing for decades. You know those nice, sweet, HoneyCrisp apples that everyone loves? Thank plant patents for supporting the program that developed it.

Monsanto's exploitation of nature to achieve a monopoly is so bad that some countries have completely banned Monsanto and its products

You're not even trying to avoid the ad populum there are you. More countries have laws against homosexuality than genetic engineering, but that doesn't make it right. By the way, they have laws against genetic engineering, not Monsanto. If this is about one single company, why do you think a, for example, GMO papaya developed by the University of Hawai'i (aka not Monsanto) would be just as illegal as a Syngenta corn, while a non-GMO tomato by Monsanto would be legal...and somehow this is about the company? Nope, it is populism combined with fearmongering combined with trade protectionism, and no one cares if science gets thrown under the bus. Stop defending it. There's no defense for it.

Oh and I'll just throw it out there that Monsanto were the ones who developed and peddled Agent Orange to the U.S. Government as a cure all for jungle warfare back in the day.

Now you're just fishing for an emotional response, and you're wrong to boot. The government developed it. Companies such as Monsanto and Dow produced it (during the Cold War, I might add). They actually warned the government about impurities. The government didn't care. And even if you were right, it still doesn't matter. You might as well stop buying Ford cars because their founder was antisemitic or stop buying Volkswagen because of their Nazi ties. You're using what's called the genetic fallacy.

In short, you are wrong. Monsanto is not the bogeyman they are made out to be. They are only the target of so many false accusations because a giant shadow overlord buying off all the independent scientists and manipulating all the data is absolutely essential to maintain the anti-GMO conspiracy. If there were no Monsanto, it would be necessary for the anti-GMO movement to create it.

Montsanto will, besides owning the entire food business, also own the entire alcoholic drink business as well.

You are wrong, promoting a bullshit conspiracy theory, and you didn't even spell Monsanto right either time.

Fair enough - and I certainly support your skeptical point of view. One would be remiss to NOT fact check.

That said, I consider my point of view on Monsanto to be informed. You may or may not choose to agree - but there are certain points which are troubling for me.

To answer your quotes, I've tried to use neutral news - but I admit that some of these sources are biased.

That's amazing to me. BP fucks the ocean, and Haliburton makes money disappear for a war, and the guys who sell this [nature.com] are the evil ones.

Corporate evil is nothing new - my first exposure was the Bhopal disaster.
Concerning BT Cotton - well - that rosy success is turning out to be a washout. The Maharashta government has had to bailout the cotton industry, and studies are showing that BT Cotton is depleting the soil of minerals (Roundup chelates minerals, making them metabolically unavailable for some period of time).
http://digitaljournal.com/article/321958

Ah, that explains why they are selling the insecticide reducing Bt crops in the above link.

In fact Monsanto said themselves that BT cotton has failed in India for bollworm protection.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/Bt+cotton+has+failed+admits+Monsanto/1/86939.html

And also the usage of pesticide in Indian BT cotton has returned to normal levels after the initial lowering.
http://indiagminfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Bt-Cotton-False-Hype-and-Failed-Promises-Final.pdf
(see section CONSUMPTION OF PESTICIDES IN VARIOUS STATES DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS 2005-06 to 2009-10 )
http://ppqs.gov.in/IpmPesticides.htm

How so? Let me guess, 'superweeds' and 'superpests'? Please, resistance breakdown and herbicide resistance are nothing new, are more cultivation issues than crop issues (particularly the resistant pests) and worst case scenario is you lose the benefits already provided.

Yes - those are problems, but problems that are solvable with traditional cultivation. My main concern with Roundup is the reduction in essential and rare minerals in foodcrop, thus requiring remediation and supplements. I'm concerned that there may be long-term effects in human and animal health.
http://www.agweb.com/assets/import/files/58P20-22.pdf

I also think that the most important research performed by Princeton's Dr. Huber deserves scientific evaluation. He is a true expert and has made some striking claims on the danger of Roundup-ready crops. Perhaps this is somewhat biased, but his resume is certainly impeccable.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1161030109000628
And an overview of Dr. Huber's presentation
http://www.greenpasture.org/fermented-cod-liver-oil-butter-oil-vitamin-d-vitamin-a/dr-huber-and-the-impact-of-glyphosate-in-the-food-chain/
And Monsanto's rebuttal:
http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/huber-pathogen-roundup-ready-crops.aspx

That must be why farmers willingly buy them, why farmers in developing countries wait in lines to get their bag of GE seed.

There are plenty of good GE seeds!! I think there are specific problems with some glyphosate-ready crops and neonicotinoid-treated seeds (which are being linked to CCD in bees). That said

All it takes is a simple google search

This is the THIRD worst, behind 1918 and 1956

Or you can go spelunking in the data here

And of course, there's absolutely no down-side to DDG, right?

Feeding it to livestock hasn't been working out that well, unfortunately:

http://discussions.agweb.com/showthread.php?1816-DDG-s-health-risk-for-livestock

You can't stop when you get the answer you want --- you have to continue following the money trail, and all the fall-out until all the dust settles.

William

This notion of subsidizing lifestyles is really annoying. If you want cheap fast broadband move to civilization. If you want clean air and open spaces move to the country

US agricultural exports are worth $98 billion. Imports $77 billion. Adavatage US. Value of U.S. Ag Exports To Rise in FY 2010 vs FY 2009

The US produces 10 billion pounds of apples each year. 1.3 billion in New York state alone. The geek tends to forget how much of the US is still rural. Northwest apple harvest strong, but with some hitches

If you live in a city like New York or Los Angeles, you import everything.

Food. Water. Power. Wood. Metal. Stone. Paper. Leather. Fabrics.

The list is endless.

There is no free lunch. No Wall-E and no Eve. No matter duplicator. No too-cheap-to-meter fusion power.

You need men in the fields. Men in the mines and in the forests.

You need trains. Trucks. Pipelines. The high tension line.

You need to keep the supplies coming in. which means that you have to make it worthwhile for people to continue to live and work "in the sticks."