Every day is Earth Day. Let's talk about ways to make it better.

1234568»

Comments

  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    PJPOWER said:
    brianlux said:
    Well HALLELUJAH!  That's cool!  Was Trump drunk when he signed this bill?  Or just didn't read it all?  Or maybe had burned a few down?
    My question is “Why did it take someone like Trump to finally get this done?”.  I’m sure plenty of other administrations had the opportunity...Useful idiot indeed.
    Good question, PJP!  Why indeed! 

    This plant has so much potential. 

    Meltdown99 , here's your solution for ridding the world of plastic.  Hemp can be used not only as a fiber but also can be made into beer, ceiling tiles, shoes, hempcrete (a type of concrete), soap, and even body parts for cars and tractors.  Yes, TRACTORS! 

    Check it out:



    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 6,219
    PJPOWER said:
    brianlux said:
    Well HALLELUJAH!  That's cool!  Was Trump drunk when he signed this bill?  Or just didn't read it all?  Or maybe had burned a few down?
    My question is “Why did it take someone like Trump to finally get this done?”.  I’m sure plenty of other administrations had the opportunity...Useful idiot indeed.
    I'm sure he didn't read it at all, because he doesn't read. But luckily someone he trusts said something positive about this, and it got done. And yes, why it hasn't been done previously is a mystery. I was always critical of Obama for being spineless on hemp and cannabis. So I will do something I almost never do and give kudos to Trump on this. It is really just common sense, and Trump would be my least likely candidate for possessing any, but here we are.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 4,408
    brianlux said:
    Well HALLELUJAH!  That's cool!  Was Trump drunk when he signed this bill?  Or just didn't read it all?  Or maybe had burned a few down?
    He didn't read the bill is my guess...
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 4,408
    These forums will flip out if he removes Cannabis as a controlled substance...lol
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,641
    edited December 2018
    These forums will flip out if he removes Cannabis as a controlled substance...lol
    It’s going to have to be soon, it is hard enough to regulate as is.  Now, throw in that its very close relative is legal and going to be produced on an industrial scale...by the truck load...on interstates...good luck search dogs.

    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    PJPOWER said:
    These forums will flip out if he removes Cannabis as a controlled substance...lol
    It’s going to have to be soon, it is hard enough to regulate as is.  Now, throw in that its very close relative is legal and going to be produced on an industrial scale...by the truck load...on interstates...good luck search dogs.

    :lol: 
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 9,324
    brianlux said:
    PJPOWER said:
    These forums will flip out if he removes Cannabis as a controlled substance...lol
    It’s going to have to be soon, it is hard enough to regulate as is.  Now, throw in that its very close relative is legal and going to be produced on an industrial scale...by the truck load...on interstates...good luck search dogs.

    :lol: 
    Actually, that’s an interesting point. I read recently that most of the older drug sniffing dogs in Canada have had to be retired because they were trained to sniff cannabis as well as other drugs, and now that cannabis is legal, anyone whose property is indicated by a dog can claim that there was not probably cause for a search because the dog was just sniffing out weed. A whole new generation of dogs is being trained right now that have not been trained to indicate cannabis. 

    Drug dog unemployment - just one of those unintended consequences of legalization. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 4,408
    Windsor just retire a member of their canine unit and bought 2 more...makes sense now.  The news said those dogs can cost up to 100 grand.
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,641
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • Meltdown99Meltdown99 None Of Your Business...Posts: 4,408
    Why not.  Some people actually want their meat grown in a lab...
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    PJPOWER said:
    I remain highly skeptical.  First off, who is Science Alert and the original publisher of the article, Futurism?  I've never hear of either.  Secondly, this does not take into account the fact that corn in mono-cropped in massive, miles wide sea of soil stripping, aquifer draining plants that rely on large amounts of petrochemical fertilizers. 

    Sadly, with an earth population of 7.53 billion people, this kind of frankenfood is necessary to prevent widespread starvation.  It's a fact of life we must live with until a balance is restored and that balance will only come when our number diminish and we return to living in conjunction with nature's cycles and balances rather than use our clever minds to try to live in opposition to nature's ways.  That can't/won't go on endlessly.
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,641
    brianlux said:
    PJPOWER said:
    I remain highly skeptical.  First off, who is Science Alert and the original publisher of the article, Futurism?  I've never hear of either.  Secondly, this does not take into account the fact that corn in mono-cropped in massive, miles wide sea of soil stripping, aquifer draining plants that rely on large amounts of petrochemical fertilizers. 

    Sadly, with an earth population of 7.53 billion people, this kind of frankenfood is necessary to prevent widespread starvation.  It's a fact of life we must live with until a balance is restored and that balance will only come when our number diminish and we return to living in conjunction with nature's cycles and balances rather than use our clever minds to try to live in opposition to nature's ways.  That can't/won't go on endlessly.
    I’m fine with scepticism and scrutinizing as long is it carries over to any studies and sources claiming GMOs are unsafe :)
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    edited January 5
    PJPOWER said:
    brianlux said:
    PJPOWER said:
    I remain highly skeptical.  First off, who is Science Alert and the original publisher of the article, Futurism?  I've never hear of either.  Secondly, this does not take into account the fact that corn in mono-cropped in massive, miles wide sea of soil stripping, aquifer draining plants that rely on large amounts of petrochemical fertilizers. 

    Sadly, with an earth population of 7.53 billion people, this kind of frankenfood is necessary to prevent widespread starvation.  It's a fact of life we must live with until a balance is restored and that balance will only come when our number diminish and we return to living in conjunction with nature's cycles and balances rather than use our clever minds to try to live in opposition to nature's ways.  That can't/won't go on endlessly.
    I’m fine with scepticism and scrutinizing as long is it carries over to any studies and sources claiming GMOs are unsafe :)
    There are plenty of them out there and yes, I've read several of them.  One of the big problems is that they are difficult to contain.  It is going to be more and more difficult for those of us who prefer not to eat GMO food (and we should have that chose, wouldn't you agree?) because of inability to contain the spread of GMO's through pollination.
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 9,324
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    What I would suggest to anyone interested in this subject is for them to ask this question:  Why are GMO's being produced in the first place? 

    For me, as long as non-GMO foods are available, that's what I'll eat.  To me it's more than just about this opinion or that one or this study or that.  Studies are like statistics- they can be bent to "prove" any point of view.  I'm more interested in what makes sense.  It does not make sense to me that we humans are so over-populated and removed from nature that we feel the need to manipulate nature to our own temporary needs... and ultimately our own undoing.   As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.  That's what makes sense to me. 
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 4,641
    edited January 5
    brianlux said:
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    What I would suggest to anyone interested in this subject is for them to ask this question:  Why are GMO's being produced in the first place? 

    For me, as long as non-GMO foods are available, that's what I'll eat.  To me it's more than just about this opinion or that one or this study or that.  Studies are like statistics- they can be bent to "prove" any point of view.  I'm more interested in what makes sense.  It does not make sense to me that we humans are so over-populated and removed from nature that we feel the need to manipulate nature to our own temporary needs... and ultimately our own undoing.   As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.  That's what makes sense to me. 
    Interesting thing is that many of the foods that we enjoy today were barely even edible without modifying through hybridization and human “unnatural” selection.  Corn, watermelons, etc...Before domestication, corn (maize) cobs only grew to about 1 inch long, for example.   
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 9,324
    brianlux said:
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    What I would suggest to anyone interested in this subject is for them to ask this question:  Why are GMO's being produced in the first place? 

    For me, as long as non-GMO foods are available, that's what I'll eat.  To me it's more than just about this opinion or that one or this study or that.  Studies are like statistics- they can be bent to "prove" any point of view.  I'm more interested in what makes sense.  It does not make sense to me that we humans are so over-populated and removed from nature that we feel the need to manipulate nature to our own temporary needs... and ultimately our own undoing.   As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.  That's what makes sense to me. 
    I disagree that studies can be bent to prove any point of view. A writer who is minded to try to do that can selectively point to some aspects of certain studies while ignoring others, but if you look at the raw data and the study design then you get the full information. The writer of the piece you posted also presented biased information. 

    One of the purposes of developing GMOs is for profit, definitely. That’s also the purpose of the farmers of all the food you eat, as well. Another purpose is to better feed people who are malnourished in many parts of the world that are not as fortunate as we are in North America. I am not personally willing to say that those people need to starve while we have ample food. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    PJPOWER said:
    brianlux said:
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    What I would suggest to anyone interested in this subject is for them to ask this question:  Why are GMO's being produced in the first place? 

    For me, as long as non-GMO foods are available, that's what I'll eat.  To me it's more than just about this opinion or that one or this study or that.  Studies are like statistics- they can be bent to "prove" any point of view.  I'm more interested in what makes sense.  It does not make sense to me that we humans are so over-populated and removed from nature that we feel the need to manipulate nature to our own temporary needs... and ultimately our own undoing.   As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.  That's what makes sense to me. 
    Interesting thing is that many of the foods that we enjoy today were barely even edible without modifying through hybridization and human “unnatural” selection.  Corn, watermelons, etc...Before domestication, corn (maize) cobs only grew to about 1 inch long, for example.   
    But there is a difference.  Hybridization of crops is simply the interbreeding of different subspecies.  Like when you mix a Labrador retriever and a poodle and get a Labradoodle.  And that could happen anyway if the Smith let Tiffy out of the yard at the same time the Jones let Bruno escape.  Wham bam Labradoodle!  That's also how you end up with Broccolini.

    Genetic engineering, on the other hand is another deal all together.

    But look, nothing I can say will ever make a bit of difference.  It's going to happen.  Humans are going to fuck with nature and nature always bats last.  I at least just want the option to not be part of that game.  But my chances of that diminish all the time passes.  I'm glad I'm getting old.

    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    brianlux said:
    brianlux said:
    Here's one good example:


    And I think it is valuable to ask what the motivation is for GMO's.  The article (and others have stated the same) points out this:

    The commercial purpose of GMOs is not to feed the world or improve farming. Rather, they exist to gain intellectual property (i.e. patent rights) over seeds and plant breeding and to drive agriculture in directions that benefit agribusiness.


    But that isn’t a study, Brian - it’s an opinion piece. 

    I don’t disagree that some of the ways that GMO crops are or could be used are problematic, but I have not yet seen good scientific data that shows that the existing GMOs are dangerous. 
    What I would suggest to anyone interested in this subject is for them to ask this question:  Why are GMO's being produced in the first place? 

    For me, as long as non-GMO foods are available, that's what I'll eat.  To me it's more than just about this opinion or that one or this study or that.  Studies are like statistics- they can be bent to "prove" any point of view.  I'm more interested in what makes sense.  It does not make sense to me that we humans are so over-populated and removed from nature that we feel the need to manipulate nature to our own temporary needs... and ultimately our own undoing.   As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.  That's what makes sense to me. 
    I disagree that studies can be bent to prove any point of view. A writer who is minded to try to do that can selectively point to some aspects of certain studies while ignoring others, but if you look at the raw data and the study design then you get the full information. The writer of the piece you posted also presented biased information. 

    One of the purposes of developing GMOs is for profit, definitely. That’s also the purpose of the farmers of all the food you eat, as well. Another purpose is to better feed people who are malnourished in many parts of the world that are not as fortunate as we are in North America. I am not personally willing to say that those people need to starve while we have ample food. 
     
    I think you very much can bend studies to suit one's own ends, but for arguments sake let's say you are right.  OK.  But why are people malnourished in the first place?  And is genetic engineering a solution?  A preventative measure?  Or a band aid?  And what happens when the petroleum starts to become too expensive and too difficult to extract?  This will all catch up to us.  You can't run from nature.
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • PapPap Serres, GreecePosts: 20,700
    brianlux said: As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.

    Ooh, yeah! All right!
    Were [Pearl] jammin
    I wanna [Pearl] jam it wid you.
    Were [Pearl] jammin, [Pearl] jammin
    And I hope you like [Pearl] jammin too.


    Sep 30, 2006 - OAKA Sports Hall - Athens, Greece
    Jul 11, 2014 - Milton Keynes Bowl - Milton Keynes, UK
  • Jason PJason P Posts: 17,379
    My environmentalist neighbors put solar panels on their house a few months ago ... two weeks ago I came home to find that they had three mature maple trees in their front yard cut down because they were blocking the sun from hitting the panels.

    Ohhh, sweet irony ...
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    Jason P said:
    My environmentalist neighbors put solar panels on their house a few months ago ... two weeks ago I came home to find that they had three mature maple trees in their front yard cut down because they were blocking the sun from hitting the panels.

    Ohhh, sweet irony ...
    That's lame.  Solar panels can go places other than roofs.  Some people just don't think!
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 26,049
    Pap said:
    brianlux said: As humans more further and further from living in a natural state, I believe we will have no choice but to learn to live again with nature's balances and cycles or die off as a species.

    Beautiful, Pap!
    "Love and only love will break it down"
    -Neil Young
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.





  • PapPap Serres, GreecePosts: 20,700
    edited January 18
    Ooh, yeah! All right!
    Were [Pearl] jammin
    I wanna [Pearl] jam it wid you.
    Were [Pearl] jammin, [Pearl] jammin
    And I hope you like [Pearl] jammin too.


    Sep 30, 2006 - OAKA Sports Hall - Athens, Greece
    Jul 11, 2014 - Milton Keynes Bowl - Milton Keynes, UK
1234568»
Sign In or Register to comment.