Neil Young takes on Monsanto

2»

Comments

  • JimmyVJimmyV Boston's MetroWestPosts: 12,559
    He lost me with his claim that AM radio sounded better than streaming. Figure this has more to do with finances than sound quality.
    ___________________________________________

    "...I changed by not changing at all..."
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,094
    edited July 2015
    Other than talking about NY,we're definitely getting off topic. How unusual, LOL!

    Back in '92, Young wrote an article called "Digital is a Huge Rip-Off" (in Guitar Player, May '92, p.14). I wish I could find the text for that article to reprint it here. It'ss worth checking out because it illustrates how Neil has had a huge concern for sound quality for a long time. And we're not talking snooty $250,000 audiophile stuff- just good quality sound sources for what ever stereo a person can afford Young. Immediately upon pulling his music off streaming, Young has been bombarded with accusations of doing this to promote his Pono system in order to make more money. I'm not inside the guys head so I can't say this for sure, but having been a fan and following the man's work for just shy of 50 years, I really, really doubt that is his motivation. The man has championed quality recording sound for a long time. He continues to care about the sound issue and continues to make new music and push himself because he is true to the art. He's not one of these guys who sits back and rehashes his old stuff endlessly for the easy buck. Fans who have issues with how Young makes and distributes his music probably are not very familiar with those aspects of his work ethic.

    Edit: I got my first AM radio in 1965. I went to bed and but the mono ear piece in one ear and was in music heaven. That night I heard Dylan's "Like A Rolling Stone" for the first time and my mind was blown and permanently rearranged in good order. Maybe that's why I'm good with AM radio sound, haha, but hey, it was analog!
    Post edited by brianlux on
    "Hate your job, love your stuff
    If you think that's living, you are
    Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong"
    -Juliana Hatfield
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.







  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,094
    dignin said:

    Can anyone post some peer reviewed research showing the correlation between GMO's and negative health affects on humans?

    http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=57871#.Vaq-JfmCV-y

    "Hate your job, love your stuff
    If you think that's living, you are
    Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong"
    -Juliana Hatfield
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.







  • FreeFree Posts: 3,562
    http://www.theyucatantimes.com/2016/09/monsanto-loses-gmo-permit-in-mexico/

    Monsanto loses GMO permit in Mexico
    ...“A district judge in the state of Yucatán last month overturned a permit issued to Monsanto by Mexico’s agriculture ministry, Sagarpa, and environmental protection agency, Semarnat, in June 2012 that allowed commercial planting of Round-up ready Soybeans. In withdrawing the permit, the judge was convinced by the scientific evidence presented about the threats posed by GM soy crops to honey production in the Yucatán peninsula, which includes Campeche, Quintana Roo and Yucatán states. Co-existence between honey production and GM soybeans is not possible, the judge ruled.”
  • unsungunsung Posts: 9,486
    I did not read every reply but does Mr. Young have issue with the Obama administration assigning ex-Monsanto executives to cabinet positions?
  • Spiritual_ChaosSpiritual_Chaos Posts: 15,553

    Documents Reveal Monsanto Surveilled Journalists, Activists & Even Musician Neil Young


    The man they call my enemy. I've seen his eyes, he looks just like me - A mirror...
  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 15,341
    ummm, arent there different categories for gmo products?

    like with monsanto, these are primarily chemical based arent they? with gene manipulation.

    other side of gmo are the hybrids and the like.

    and some mix in between.
    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,094
    mickeyrat said:
    ummm, arent there different categories for gmo products?

    like with monsanto, these are primarily chemical based arent they? with gene manipulation.

    other side of gmo are the hybrids and the like.

    and some mix in between.
    I think so.  I see hybrid GMO as something very different than laboratory/ chemical bases GMO. 

    On the other end of the spectrum are heirloom plants vegetables, strains of which are being kept alive by organizations such as Seed Savers Exchange:


    "Hate your job, love your stuff
    If you think that's living, you are
    Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong"
    -Juliana Hatfield
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.







  • mickeyratmickeyrat Posts: 15,341
    brianlux said:
    mickeyrat said:
    ummm, arent there different categories for gmo products?

    like with monsanto, these are primarily chemical based arent they? with gene manipulation.

    other side of gmo are the hybrids and the like.

    and some mix in between.
    I think so.  I see hybrid GMO as something very different than laboratory/ chemical bases GMO. 

    On the other end of the spectrum are heirloom plants vegetables, strains of which are being kept alive by organizations such as Seed Savers Exchange:


    so why isnt the distinction made in the anti argument? seems the narrative conveniently overlooks the hybrids or other nonchem methods of modification.


    _____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________

    Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
    you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
    memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
    another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
  • brianluxbrianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain.Posts: 28,094
    mickeyrat said:
    brianlux said:
    mickeyrat said:
    ummm, arent there different categories for gmo products?

    like with monsanto, these are primarily chemical based arent they? with gene manipulation.

    other side of gmo are the hybrids and the like.

    and some mix in between.
    I think so.  I see hybrid GMO as something very different than laboratory/ chemical bases GMO. 

    On the other end of the spectrum are heirloom plants vegetables, strains of which are being kept alive by organizations such as Seed Savers Exchange:


    so why isnt the distinction made in the anti argument? seems the narrative conveniently overlooks the hybrids or other nonchem methods of modification.


    I think we need different terms to distinguish the two.

    By the way, in a more perfect world with a reasonable number of humans (as opposed to our overpopulation) I would argue in favor of eliminating most hybrids with a few exceptions including cannabis for medical purposes.  But we're in very imperfect human dominated world and hybrids are everywhere so "no go" on that one.
    "Hate your job, love your stuff
    If you think that's living, you are
    Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong"
    -Juliana Hatfield
    ***********
    M.I.T.S.







Sign In or Register to comment.