As part of the license agreements that come with the GMO seeds, Farmers are no longer permitted to keep behind a portion of their crop to plant the following year, should they wish, and are thus forced to buy new seed every year.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Another myth spread by the organic foods industry.
Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds, Busted
Myth 1: Seeds from GMOs are sterile.
Myth 2: Monsanto will sue you for growing their patented GMOs if traces of those GMOs entered your fields through wind-blown pollen.
Myth 3: Any contamination with GMOs makes organic food non-organic.
Myth 4: Before Monsanto got in the way, farmers typically saved their seeds and re-used them.
By the time Monsanto got into the seed business, most farmers in the U.S. and Europe were already relying on seed that they bought every year from older seed companies. This is especially true of corn farmers, who've been growing almost exclusively commercial hybrids for more than half a century. (If you re-plant seeds from hybrids, you get a mixture of inferior varieties.) But even soybean and cotton farmers who don't grow hybrids were moving in that direction.
This shift started with the rise of commercial seed companies, not the advent of genetic engineering. But Monsanto and GMOs certainly accelerated the trend drastically.
Myth 5: Most seeds these days are genetically modified.
It's not. All those fossil fuels, and we're just starting to burn them, have been living biological stuff before. Before they were, the C they contain was in the atmosphere as CO2.
Different kind of Carbon which is how we can tell the increase is from fossil fuels.
You might also want to think about the difference in timeframes. It took millions of years to remove the carbon, but we have replaced it in less than 100 years.
I want people to be successful and find their own paths to happiness in life.
And there is nothing about providing a free education for everyone interferes with your plan or theirs. In fact, providing resources for everyone, such as education without cost to them, makes for more happiness instead of less. There was nothing in geekoids presentation about making people get an education or saying which education they had to get.
Your argument fails.
I've said for years the real money lies in being a welder, plumber, or an electrician.
Only until the market gluts. Once there are enough people then there will be too many and the jobs will drop in wages. The article says that 200,000 jobs go unfilled, but if 1,000,000 people were available then the jobs would pay crap. It's the way the market works. Supply and demand.
Very few places will suddenly lose all value. They will just lose value for farming a specific crop. It may case a crop change, or change to ranching, or perhaps natural gas fracking...
Inhospitable desert land is so the rage these days. Everyone wants to live in the desert. Wait. No, they don't.
You do realize that the closer you get to the poles the less land area exists for people to live on. This means less land area for people to live and for people to grow food on and for people. You also don't seem to consider, like most, the economic costs of turning that land into useful places for people to grow. How much would it cost to turn the forests of Canada into farmland and living area? Imagine trying to fit 630,000,000 people, the populations of the United States/Mexico/Central America/Caribbean, into the land of Canada. Do you think Canada, or Greenland, will be interested in just welcoming all the displaced people into their national borders? Of course, I'm sure that everyone will just cooperate and say come on in. Or will they say we don't want your kind here and say no. What ya gonna do then? Invade? Become an illegal immigrant?
Tell me again who the cost of making changes now will be more expensive and less conflict causing than changing our habits now.
You won't have any trouble getting your fill then. The vast majority of sci-fi is depressing, dark and dystopian. The great thing about Star Trek, at least with TOS and TNG, was the optimism, but DS9, Voyager, Enterprise and every movie except The Motion Picture and The Voyage Home were simply more war movies in space. Just like 95% of the sci-fi available now.
I'll go a step further.. Is ANYbody stupid enough to believe anything this GOVERNMENT says??
Your entire rant is based on the premise that the Bush adminstration was so much better. They started the secret surveillance, but Obama gets the blame because he is still using it. Do you not see the cognitive dissonance here? I sure do.
I think a major problem when discussing science versus religion is that people allow synonymous words to become equivalent words. There is a lot of difference in meaning between acceptance, admission, assent, assumption, assurance, avowal, axiom, certainty, conclusion, confidence, conjecture, conviction, credence, credit, deduction, divination, expectation, faith, fancy, feeling, guess, hope, hypothesis, idea, impression, intuition, judgment, knowledge, mind, mindset, notion, opinion, persuasion, position, postulation, presumption, presupposition, profession, reliance, supposition, surmise, suspicion, theorem, theory, thesis, thinking, trust, understanding and view which are all synonyms for belief. However, religious people want to make them absolutely equivalent.
I have confidence, conviction, reliance, trust and understanding in the mechanisms and results of science, but that doesn't mean I believe in them. It also doesn't mean that my belief in science, if you want to use the term, is the same as a religious followers belief in their imaginary mechanisms and motivators. Not even in the same ball park with regards to evidence.
What part of cause and symptoms don't you people get? Global warming is the cause and the symptoms are climate change. It isn't a matter of one or the other. It's a matter of cause and effect. Then again, that is science and not wishful thinking which is what global warming>>climate change denial is all about. It might do you good to start paying attention to scientist and not economist. politicians and lawyers.
She lived longer than all his other patients, double over the next highest person.
Ummm. The fact that she lived longer than other patients just means that she lived longer than other patients. I am sure that some patients lived a lot less than other patients. It had nothing to do with god. It had to do with the fact that people react to diseases and treatments differently. Some people live longer than some people who live longer than some people.
Spending $130 million to test something could be tested for $0.25 million is a waste of money.
To pretend that the entire mission would be dedicated to getting a 3D printer into orbit is to be obtuse to the point of ridiculous. Send it up as a cargo module on a regular flight just like many other experimental packages.
I can't understand why you insist on the solution being one or the other. I see this all the time, but I can never figure out why. Humans tend to be so one-dimensional in their planning and thinking.
Do you honestly think that the great masses of homo sapiens are even interested in the kind of evolution you are talking about? I see absolutely no evidence of the kinds of changes you are talking about on a large enough scale to be relevant.
Terraforming: over many decades, the Earth will pretty much automatically recover ecosystems, and terraform itself back into a hospitable planet.
This reflects a serious misunderstanding of the mechanics of recovery from E.L.E.'s. The ecosystem doesn't recover in decades even with the possibility of terraforming. It would be a centuries to millennium process. Way too many people think of the geosphere, atmosphere and biosphere as devices we can just adjust if we just turn the nobs. Its the same kind of reasoning which says geoengineering will solve the global warming problem. Throw some dust in the air and drop the temp a few degrees. Too cold, stop putting dust in the air and raise the temp a few degrees. The environment doesn't work that way.
a better solution to the types of problems it's supposed to fix ("eggs in one basket")
No, it isn't. There are somethings the universe can do that which make being off planet essential for survival. A large scale CME that wipes the van Allen belt away and strips the atmosphere from the planet. A gamma ray burst which completely sterilizes the entire planet. An asteroid collision that destroys a large section of the globe. The details are extremely well explained in Phil Plait's Death from the Skies and would clearly be beyond the capability of the humans in domes survival strategy.
It does so by noting minute changes in gravitational pull caused by local changes in Earth's mass. Masses of ice, air, water and solid Earth can be moved by weather patterns, seasonal change, climate change and even tectonic events such as large earthquakes. To track these changes, GRACE uses GPS and a microwave ranging system to measure micron-scale variations in the 220-kilometer (137-mile) separation between the two spacecraft, developed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.
These measurements are used to produce monthly gravity maps that are more than 100 times more precise than previous models, providing the resolution necessary to characterize how Earth’s gravity field varies over time and space, and over land and sea. The data have substantially improved the accuracy of techniques used by oceanographers, hydrologists, glaciologists, geologists and climate scientists.
Given the complete lack of doing anything about it, as exemplified by this reading, this should be the default position for everyone involved. There is no hint that anything will be done about it before it gets a lot worse. Not on a large enough scale to actually alleviate the problem so I take the adaptation approach in the hopes that humanity will get motivated enough to mitigate the damage. So far the bets are on human apathy.
Every time I read a statement about this I question the research capacity of people. The fact that I see this on a computer technology forum makes my brain sad.
No, he didn't invent the Internet. He just created the bill which underlay a lot of Internet development.
Among the many technological achievements that resulted from the funding of the Gore Bill, was the development of Mosaic in 1993,the World Wide Web browser software which is credited by most scholars as beginning the Internet boom of the 1990s:
Gore's legislation also helped fund the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois, where a team of programmers, including Netscape founder Marc Andreessen, created the Mosaic Web browser, the commercial Internet's technological springboard. 'If it had been left to private industry, it wouldn't have happened,' Andreessen says of Gore's bill, 'at least, not until years later.'
Also, social programs don't do anybody any long term favors. The give a man a fish and teach him to fish analogy comes to mind.
Except that rich people are hoarding all the fish which leaves very little for non-rich people to catch. Concentration of wealth in the hands of few is equal to over-fishing.
There is absolutely no way for you to prove this. Just because things happened that way doesn't mean that they couldn't have happened another way. Post Hoc, Ergo Proctor Hoc and all that.
Slashdot Mirror
Minimum wages are anti-Libertarian, and thus, anti-free state project.
As part of the license agreements that come with the GMO seeds, Farmers are no longer permitted to keep behind a portion of their crop to plant the following year, should they wish, and are thus forced to buy new seed every year.
Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Another myth spread by the organic foods industry. Top Five Myths Of Genetically Modified Seeds, Busted
Myth 1: Seeds from GMOs are sterile.
Myth 2: Monsanto will sue you for growing their patented GMOs if traces of those GMOs entered your fields through wind-blown pollen.
Myth 3: Any contamination with GMOs makes organic food non-organic.
Myth 4: Before Monsanto got in the way, farmers typically saved their seeds and re-used them. By the time Monsanto got into the seed business, most farmers in the U.S. and Europe were already relying on seed that they bought every year from older seed companies. This is especially true of corn farmers, who've been growing almost exclusively commercial hybrids for more than half a century. (If you re-plant seeds from hybrids, you get a mixture of inferior varieties.) But even soybean and cotton farmers who don't grow hybrids were moving in that direction. This shift started with the rise of commercial seed companies, not the advent of genetic engineering. But Monsanto and GMOs certainly accelerated the trend drastically.
Myth 5: Most seeds these days are genetically modified.
Different kind of Carbon which is how we can tell the increase is from fossil fuels. You might also want to think about the difference in timeframes. It took millions of years to remove the carbon, but we have replaced it in less than 100 years.
And there is nothing about providing a free education for everyone interferes with your plan or theirs. In fact, providing resources for everyone, such as education without cost to them, makes for more happiness instead of less. There was nothing in geekoids presentation about making people get an education or saying which education they had to get. Your argument fails.
Only until the market gluts. Once there are enough people then there will be too many and the jobs will drop in wages. The article says that 200,000 jobs go unfilled, but if 1,000,000 people were available then the jobs would pay crap. It's the way the market works. Supply and demand.
Hmmm. Maybe if those white people weren't such racists asses that they react to black people by running away the place would be different.
Please, please stay away from me in a firefight. You can't tell the difference between a power driver and a gun.
Inhospitable desert land is so the rage these days. Everyone wants to live in the desert. Wait. No, they don't. You do realize that the closer you get to the poles the less land area exists for people to live on. This means less land area for people to live and for people to grow food on and for people. You also don't seem to consider, like most, the economic costs of turning that land into useful places for people to grow. How much would it cost to turn the forests of Canada into farmland and living area? Imagine trying to fit 630,000,000 people, the populations of the United States/Mexico/Central America/Caribbean, into the land of Canada. Do you think Canada, or Greenland, will be interested in just welcoming all the displaced people into their national borders? Of course, I'm sure that everyone will just cooperate and say come on in. Or will they say we don't want your kind here and say no. What ya gonna do then? Invade? Become an illegal immigrant? Tell me again who the cost of making changes now will be more expensive and less conflict causing than changing our habits now.
Gore's Law
You won't have any trouble getting your fill then. The vast majority of sci-fi is depressing, dark and dystopian. The great thing about Star Trek, at least with TOS and TNG, was the optimism, but DS9, Voyager, Enterprise and every movie except The Motion Picture and The Voyage Home were simply more war movies in space. Just like 95% of the sci-fi available now.
I'll go a step further.. Is ANYbody stupid enough to believe anything this GOVERNMENT says??
Your entire rant is based on the premise that the Bush adminstration was so much better. They started the secret surveillance, but Obama gets the blame because he is still using it. Do you not see the cognitive dissonance here? I sure do.
Or use them to feed your tilapia or other aquaponically raised fish.
I think a major problem when discussing science versus religion is that people allow synonymous words to become equivalent words. There is a lot of difference in meaning between acceptance, admission, assent, assumption, assurance, avowal, axiom, certainty, conclusion, confidence, conjecture, conviction, credence, credit, deduction, divination, expectation, faith, fancy, feeling, guess, hope, hypothesis, idea, impression, intuition, judgment, knowledge, mind, mindset, notion, opinion, persuasion, position, postulation, presumption, presupposition, profession, reliance, supposition, surmise, suspicion, theorem, theory, thesis, thinking, trust, understanding and view which are all synonyms for belief. However, religious people want to make them absolutely equivalent. I have confidence, conviction, reliance, trust and understanding in the mechanisms and results of science, but that doesn't mean I believe in them. It also doesn't mean that my belief in science, if you want to use the term, is the same as a religious followers belief in their imaginary mechanisms and motivators. Not even in the same ball park with regards to evidence.
What part of cause and symptoms don't you people get? Global warming is the cause and the symptoms are climate change. It isn't a matter of one or the other. It's a matter of cause and effect. Then again, that is science and not wishful thinking which is what global warming>>climate change denial is all about. It might do you good to start paying attention to scientist and not economist. politicians and lawyers.
She lived longer than all his other patients, double over the next highest person.
Ummm. The fact that she lived longer than other patients just means that she lived longer than other patients. I am sure that some patients lived a lot less than other patients. It had nothing to do with god. It had to do with the fact that people react to diseases and treatments differently. Some people live longer than some people who live longer than some people.
Spending $130 million to test something could be tested for $0.25 million is a waste of money.
To pretend that the entire mission would be dedicated to getting a 3D printer into orbit is to be obtuse to the point of ridiculous. Send it up as a cargo module on a regular flight just like many other experimental packages.
I can't understand why you insist on the solution being one or the other. I see this all the time, but I can never figure out why. Humans tend to be so one-dimensional in their planning and thinking.
Do you honestly think that the great masses of homo sapiens are even interested in the kind of evolution you are talking about? I see absolutely no evidence of the kinds of changes you are talking about on a large enough scale to be relevant.
Terraforming: over many decades, the Earth will pretty much automatically recover ecosystems, and terraform itself back into a hospitable planet.
This reflects a serious misunderstanding of the mechanics of recovery from E.L.E.'s. The ecosystem doesn't recover in decades even with the possibility of terraforming. It would be a centuries to millennium process. Way too many people think of the geosphere, atmosphere and biosphere as devices we can just adjust if we just turn the nobs. Its the same kind of reasoning which says geoengineering will solve the global warming problem. Throw some dust in the air and drop the temp a few degrees. Too cold, stop putting dust in the air and raise the temp a few degrees. The environment doesn't work that way.
a better solution to the types of problems it's supposed to fix ("eggs in one basket")
No, it isn't. There are somethings the universe can do that which make being off planet essential for survival. A large scale CME that wipes the van Allen belt away and strips the atmosphere from the planet. A gamma ray burst which completely sterilizes the entire planet. An asteroid collision that destroys a large section of the globe. The details are extremely well explained in Phil Plait's Death from the Skies and would clearly be beyond the capability of the humans in domes survival strategy.
Actually companies make money by passing such issues to the general public. Externalities is what they call it.
Given the complete lack of doing anything about it, as exemplified by this reading, this should be the default position for everyone involved. There is no hint that anything will be done about it before it gets a lot worse. Not on a large enough scale to actually alleviate the problem so I take the adaptation approach in the hopes that humanity will get motivated enough to mitigate the damage. So far the bets are on human apathy.
Al invented the internet.
Every time I read a statement about this I question the research capacity of people. The fact that I see this on a computer technology forum makes my brain sad.
No, he didn't invent the Internet. He just created the bill which underlay a lot of Internet development.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Performance_Computing_Act_of_1991#Results
what exactly is being added to the CO2 to make it poisonous? nothing, it's a necessary nutrient for what we eat.
I tell you what. Place yourself in a closed room with a 5% CO2 solution and then come back to me and tell me its not poisonous.
Except that rich people are hoarding all the fish which leaves very little for non-rich people to catch. Concentration of wealth in the hands of few is equal to over-fishing.
There is absolutely no way for you to prove this. Just because things happened that way doesn't mean that they couldn't have happened another way. Post Hoc, Ergo Proctor Hoc and all that.