Especially, when unadulterated crops get cross-pollinated with the suicidal gene.
Yeah, that's kinda the point. When cross pollination occurs, if you don't want transgenes, you don't get them. And I like the notion that GMO crops are adulterated somehow.
No. It's a botched job, because in fact, you DO get this killer gene. A job properly done would prevent cross pollination (that is, it would be impossible for the faulty pollen to fertilize normal plant). On a related note, it is not absolutely certain that the whole genotype will be transfered or expressed. Once in the wild, you've simply lost control.
And, since you consider "adulterated" not specific enough, I assure you it is actually accurate and was used purposefully, look up the definition.
The terminator technology only protects financial security of the patent holders.
[babble] it is absolutely false that is is the only thing it does.
And yes. People DO save seeds. Er... I mean they DID, until they started getting sued.
The majority of farmers don't.
Actually that depends on the region.
Monsanto funded your "scholarship," didn't they?
[snip lame attempt at sarcasm] has paid off pretty much every botanist, geneticist, biochemist, molecular biologist, agriculturist, and just about everyone else in relevant fields.
Yes, they could very well afford that. But they could limit themselves to financing apologists and "studies," like e.g. "cow milk is good for your health." FYI, Polish Academy of Sciences has issued a public appeal against adoption of GMO.
Terminator technology was developed to prevent unwanted gene transfer. You know, that thing the anti-GMO groups are always complaining about. ISo, a safeguard to prevent that would make them happy, right?
Yes! Especially, when unadulterated crops get cross-pollinated with the suicidal gene. Give me a break. The terminator technology only protects financial security of the patent holders.
And yes. People DO save seeds. Er... I mean they DID, until they started getting sued.
Yeah, those Bt crops needing less pesticides & containing less mycotoxins and those Ht crops needing less soil eroding & environment damaging tillage both giving higher yields are just sooooo terrible.
Yes they are, because higher yield is a myth and the plants are killing insects indiscriminately (see honeybees). Also, familiarize yourself with terminator gene.
Also, why not hit it with a big Big BIG nuke when it happens to be in the keyhole? Even a few cm/s delta-V would give great distance in 7 year's scale. Or am I wrong?
When was the last time you actually researched the subject? It looks like you are basing your argument on feelings and misinformation. The modern Thorium / molten salt reactors are extremely safe, efficient and clean; actually the cleanest possible method to produce energy en masse.
Not very long ago. The MSR designs are not modern, the technology is 5 decades old. Where are the "safe" power plants? Oh, wait, there are none. And you will not be able to flag them "safe" until a number of them have worked flawlessly in real life conditions for a few decades. Simply put, "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is."
Would you argue that building wind mills is a more sustainable solution? The initial waste from building one windmill pollutes more than a cole plant would pollute given the same amount of energy produced over the lifetime of the windmill, were it to run in optima forma.
[Citation needed] on that windmill pollution. Also, mining the nuclear fuel destroys the environment in a constant manner.
Perhaps you should realize that there's nothing wrong with the western lifestyle.
Perhaps YOU should take your head out of your ass.
And there is no shortage of power, and it's 100% sustainable.
Call me in a million years, when all reserves of thorium are depleted. I can guarantee you that by then, the sun will be shining, the wind will be blowing, the waves will be rolling and the rivers will be flowing.
Nuclear is a cheap, easy, simple method to provide lots of power.
None of the above.
it has astronomical initial cost,
it has high maintenance cost,
it leaves millions of tons of structural junk that takes decades to clean up,
if^W when shit hits the fan, the stench is unbearable,
If one accepts the value of a government, on must accept limitations on freedoms, including speech.
No.
right to free speech or religion
Religion is the first and foremost (and idiotic) means of limiting freedoms.
Only an anarchist would say that freedom of the murderer trumps the right of the victim to live.
An anarchist wouldn't say that. An authoritarian could say something like that (G. W. Bush).
If there are no limitations on the rights of protestors, they can't be stopped from infringing on others freedoms of speech, safety, life, etc.
Anarchy does not limit the right to defend yourself or to intercede in a violent dispute. In this case the police behaved like anarchists and triggered an appropriate response.
Slashdot Mirror
That's A+B = sour grapes.
Gates had only business ideas. Jobs had at least a few technological epiphanies. (IANAU = I Am Not Apple User)
That is inequality. And, since you're delving into maths, funcionality and philosophy are not cardinal values, more like sets.
At 40 light-years, they are definitely not among the 7 closest stars to earth :
I think there might be a difference between a star and a star system, but IANAA.
And this.
Yeah.
The cry proteins used in the Bt GMOs are actually very specific
You may assume that, but that's just an assumption.
Especially, when unadulterated crops get cross-pollinated with the suicidal gene.
Yeah, that's kinda the point. When cross pollination occurs, if you don't want transgenes, you don't get them. And I like the notion that GMO crops are adulterated somehow.
No. It's a botched job, because in fact, you DO get this killer gene. A job properly done would prevent cross pollination (that is, it would be impossible for the faulty pollen to fertilize normal plant). On a related note, it is not absolutely certain that the whole genotype will be transfered or expressed. Once in the wild, you've simply lost control.
And, since you consider "adulterated" not specific enough, I assure you it is actually accurate and was used purposefully, look up the definition.
The terminator technology only protects financial security of the patent holders.
[babble] it is absolutely false that is is the only thing it does.
Really?
And yes. People DO save seeds. Er... I mean they DID, until they started getting sued.
The majority of farmers don't.
Actually that depends on the region.
Monsanto funded your "scholarship," didn't they?
[snip lame attempt at sarcasm] has paid off pretty much every botanist, geneticist, biochemist, molecular biologist, agriculturist, and just about everyone else in relevant fields.
Yes, they could very well afford that. But they could limit themselves to financing apologists and "studies," like e.g. "cow milk is good for your health." FYI, Polish Academy of Sciences has issued a public appeal against adoption of GMO.
That higher yield doesn't man shit when an heirloom cultivar with a smaller fruit contains more nutrition than TWO larger GMO fruits combined.
Even worse. There is a strain of GM potato that is simply inedible. Even by the least fastidious animals.
Terminator technology was developed to prevent unwanted gene transfer. You know, that thing the anti-GMO groups are always complaining about. ISo, a safeguard to prevent that would make them happy, right?
Yes! Especially, when unadulterated crops get cross-pollinated with the suicidal gene. Give me a break. The terminator technology only protects financial security of the patent holders.
And yes. People DO save seeds. Er... I mean they DID, until they started getting sued.
Monsanto funded your "scholarship," didn't they?
Yeah, those Bt crops needing less pesticides & containing less mycotoxins and those Ht crops needing less soil eroding & environment damaging tillage both giving higher yields are just sooooo terrible.
Yes they are, because higher yield is a myth and the plants are killing insects indiscriminately (see honeybees). Also, familiarize yourself with terminator gene.
None of the Rx eyedrops for glaucoma are cheap.
Or nearly as effective, for that matter.
"Freedom of speech doesn’t protect speech you like; it protects speech you don’t like." -- Larry Flynt
"The worst thing about censorship is ###### ####."
Also, the "junk filter" is as bad as DHTML routines on this page. No, really. It is. Seriously.
Also, why not hit it with a big Big BIG nuke when it happens to be in the keyhole? Even a few cm/s delta-V would give great distance in 7 year's scale. Or am I wrong?
When was the last time you actually researched the subject? It looks like you are basing your argument on feelings and misinformation. The modern Thorium / molten salt reactors are extremely safe, efficient and clean; actually the cleanest possible method to produce energy en masse.
Not very long ago. The MSR designs are not modern, the technology is 5 decades old. Where are the "safe" power plants? Oh, wait, there are none. And you will not be able to flag them "safe" until a number of them have worked flawlessly in real life conditions for a few decades. Simply put, "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is."
Would you argue that building wind mills is a more sustainable solution? The initial waste from building one windmill pollutes more than a cole plant would pollute given the same amount of energy produced over the lifetime of the windmill, were it to run in optima forma.
[Citation needed] on that windmill pollution. Also, mining the nuclear fuel destroys the environment in a constant manner.
Maybe it's a red giant remnant (carbon core)?
One flaw is how to best simulate their sun for grass/animals.
Let the light in and keep it there. No sun substitute required.
Perhaps you should realize that there's nothing wrong with the western lifestyle.
Perhaps YOU should take your head out of your ass.
And there is no shortage of power, and it's 100% sustainable.
Call me in a million years, when all reserves of thorium are depleted. I can guarantee you that by then, the sun will be shining, the wind will be blowing, the waves will be rolling and the rivers will be flowing.
Nuclear is a cheap, easy, simple method to provide lots of power.
None of the above.
That's an anarchist argument.
Yes.
If one accepts the value of a government, on must accept limitations on freedoms, including speech.
No.
right to free speech or religion
Religion is the first and foremost (and idiotic) means of limiting freedoms.
Only an anarchist would say that freedom of the murderer trumps the right of the victim to live.
An anarchist wouldn't say that. An authoritarian could say something like that (G. W. Bush).
If there are no limitations on the rights of protestors, they can't be stopped from infringing on others freedoms of speech, safety, life, etc.
Anarchy does not limit the right to defend yourself or to intercede in a violent dispute. In this case the police behaved like anarchists and triggered an appropriate response.
Also, familiarize yourself with the concept of a sit-down strike , ok?
Limited "free" speech is not free at all.
Privately owned "public" transportation/space is not public at all.
Do you realize that you can compile for the target architecture on different machine?
Sirius B.
His name is not a symbol, it's a value.
Not all Matter has Mass.
Even photons have mass when it serves them.