calfoxwc Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 A lot of farmers are dumping roundup on fields like you would not believe. A farmer told me in disgust when I didn't trust it.... that it was harmless, and you could drink it. There needs to be an agricultureral revisit to profitability vs health of environment...and people. Big serious trouble. http://www.motherjones.com/tom-philpott/2015/10/monsanto-stock-decline-layoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opal312 Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Round Up ready corn and grains contain the pesticide in the DNA of the harvested product. It stays in your system and can cause cancer. It does in test rats. What they don't tell you is the cows, pigs etc that are fed this Roundup ready grain go sterile at very high rates. They banned GMOS in European countries including Russia and China and Mexico. The unintended consequences of these GMOS in our food supply will affect us for generations and also contamination of soil is spread by winds, rain etc to other farms.even in Mexico. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Cal posted a link from Mother Jones. I had to make sure I wasn't dreaming it haha. I am not against GMOs. We have ,in one form or another,genetically modified crops and livestock since the beginning of agriculture. The problem comes when a company can monopolize through the help of the federal government and offer up questionably unsafe products. Monsanto has all of the regulating agencies in their pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 Thanks Obamao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 11, 2015 Report Share Posted October 11, 2015 I agree with Cal, more regulation of private business! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 You could be dyslexic or something, woodpecker. I didn't say the gov should step in and clamp down.... I said "agricultural revisit". That means that people in agriculture should research the product, and the damage it does to soil. profitability sinks as the soil gets more and more sterile and poisoned with herbicides, pesticides, and artificial fertilizers need to be dumped at higher and higher rates. We've had hundreds and hundreds of people tell us that our tomatoes are excellent, and they can't stand to try to eat one from the store. A lot of older folks say our all naturally grown tomatoes taste like the ones they used to grow when they were kids - no garbage sprayed on them. http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/rough/2005/07/seeds_of_suicid.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 1 Gal White Vinegar 1cup Salt 2 tbls Blue Dawn. Don't spray it on anything you don't want dead.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 Thanks Obamao. oh no you don't. The party that took the regs off Monsanto were the republicans. Monsanto's executive brass throughout the years was littered with repbublican politicians that once done with public office got a nice cushy job with them. Nice try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 Posted Yesterday, 10:13 PM 1 Gal White Vinegar 1cup Salt 2 tbls Blue Dawn. Axe ************************** Actually, I have heard of this, will try it on the garden next year to prep for planting... but the 2.5 acre and ten acre fields ... that would be way too much vinegar/ salt and blue dawn, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 Sure, define your term "agricultural revisit" how you like. Only fair. So no regulation then? Monsanto is free to do as they wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 This is unsubstantiated rumor, but I read awhile back that one of the biggest reasons Putin is so hot about NATO moving around him is that these countries immediately open their doors to countries like Monsanto. Supposedly, and I'm sure this could be veified, Monsanto built a huge complex in Ukraine. The article went on to explain that Ukraine was once considered Russia's breadbasket. Putin obviously wants to build a new iteration of the USSR and apparently doesn't tolerate GMO"s. That coincides with another unsubstantiated story that Putin told Kerry that Russia would go to war over the massive Bee colony collapse that's been goin on for a few years now if it came out that all these bullshit chemicals being distributed around the globe by dumbass companies like Monsanto were to blame. All unsubstantiated of course. But if true, paints Mr Vladimir in a slightly different tone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 GMOs are unhealthy Vaccines cause autism Nuclear power is bad Greenpeace is legit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 woody changes subject, cleve changes subject. check. woody bitches and bitches about anything, then decides "agricultural revisit", my phrase, means total regulation or no regulation. I simply meant that people in agriculture need to take a whole new look at how they are buying and using these products, and the long term affects on soil. Gov regs was never the subject. woodypeckerhead doesn't have the ability to intelligently in the vast majority of threads. Pretty birdbrained... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 12, 2015 Report Share Posted October 12, 2015 So you want people to just make good decisions on their own, and consider the future health of the environment? But you think that can get done without any govt regulation You seemed to be getting some ideological wires crossed when it is something that affects you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 13, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 you seem to be a asswipe woodypeckerhead. do you have a nanny that helps you get up and to work in the morning? Seriously, do you know ANYTHING about life, and politics, and people, and nature.... ever BEEN ANYWHERE? ever DONE ANYTHING? EVER? egad, you are boring and stupid. did you grow up on a deserted island surrounded by cacti and birds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 I guess when you have nothing better to say, we get long, drawn out insults. Lovely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 So you want people to just make good decisions on their own, and consider the future health of the environment? But you think that can get done without any govt regulation You seemed to be getting some ideological wires crossed when it is something that affects you. And this is a little bit ironic. I'm not being insulting at all here but you can't really just assume that the government knows what it's doing in these situations. Blind trust in the government is no better than blind trust in the Tea Party.Assuming that the Obama administration is going to make the right decision in the Monsanto case is a little bit like my country right or wrong isn't it? The reason I bring that up with such little knowledge of the Monsanto case is that political sides will choose direction based primarily upon spite. Case in point, & I don't want to hijack the thread, the Obama administration decision to back the isis rebels that the Russians aren't backing. I think different parties could back or oppose Monsanto just as a political maneuver. Does that sound outrageous? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 I don't care about what political parties want one way or another. I believe though that large scale changes like this, across industries, can't happen without some regulation. Will it be perfect and solve everything? Probably not. But it is better than just hoping people do the right thing. If we used that philosophy I probably wouldn't eat sausage for one Same goes with climate change (with is the ironic double standard cal is working with here). I don't think any meaningful change can be done without govt intervention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 Case in point, & I don't want to hijack the thread, the Obama administration decision to back the isis rebels Oh now Obama's backing ISIS? I know you guys would adore yourselves if that was true but it isn't so you can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 Oh now Obama's backing ISIS? I know you guys would adore yourselves if that was true but it isn't so you can't. The Obama administration in this particular case is just doing the knee jerk in opposition to the Ruskies. I've never thought that was a good idea no matter who the president is. I don't think Assad is any worse than anybody down there, quite possibly less so. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 Instead of acting, Obamao reacts, and poorly. The Russians know he is weak and are taking advantage, as are the Iranians and Chinese. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted October 13, 2015 Report Share Posted October 13, 2015 I simply meant that people in agriculture need to take a whole new look at how they are buying and using these products, and the long term affects on soil. Gov regs was never the subject. woodypeckerhead doesn't have the ability to intelligently in the vast majority of threads. Pretty birdbrained... 1) The problem though cal is that large scale industrial farms will never go off these chemicals unless the gov forces them to. 2) Nothing Woody says is belligerent and unintelligent, like how you constantly go after him .If you can't respond normally to a guy like woody it shows he's intellectually all in your head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Your first point - maybe - money talks, and profitability is forefront. But there are other weed killers that are organic... but I still think it should happen. and about woodpecker - he isn't in anything - I simply am trying to retrain him from his constant dipstick one liners and antagonistic arseholish deviations from the subject. It's a simpleton's game - I can talk about anything, and he will say something outlandish to the nth degree, about something he is deliberately putting up there to change the subject. It's a liberal mind game maybe... I can bash higgardly clinton, and it's "he hates all women"... I can post about Ben Carson being harrassed by the left, and he'll stupidly say something like "oh yeah, Cal thinks nobody on earth has ever been harrassed"... See? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 do you understand how quotations work? if you refer to me, then put a statement in quotes, that generally tells me you're trying to quote something I said.... You say I derail the masterful points you think you're making, and then post things about me I haven't said or don't believe.... ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Woody... of course I understand how they work. I was an English major, Speech minor, in secondary education, before I went into the service. There are several uses of quotation marks. Sadly for you, you don't get to determine that they are only to be used in direct quotation. For iinstance: http://www.thepunctuationguide.com/quotation-marks.html Quotation marks Quotation marks are primarily used to indicate material that is being reproduced word for word, as well as some other important uses. This entry consists of the following sections: Quotation marks and adjacent punctuation Quoting the words of others Run-in quotations Block quotations Punctuation used to introduce the quoted material Quotes within quotes Other uses of quotation marks Writing about letters and words Translations Scare quotes Nicknames Measurements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Scare quotes Scare quotes are used to cast doubt on a word or phrase, or to emphasize that the word or phrase is being used as a euphemism. Scare quotes are best used in moderation. He rarely spoke of the “incident” that caused him to leave his previous employer. The think tank’s “analysis” of the issue left much to be desired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Now, understand, that I often have literally used the word "Translation"... as in "So-and-so translation" Translations As an alternative to parentheses, quotation marks can be used to enclose a translation. In this case, it is necessary to set the translation off with commas. His knowledge of Portuguese is limited to obrigado, “thank you,” and adeus, “goodbye.” Less commonly, single quotation marks are used in place of parentheses, in which case the translation is not set off with commas. Also, any punctuation otherwise required by the structure of the sentence is placed outside the single quotation marks. His knowledge of Portuguese is limited to obrigado ‘thank you’ and adeus ‘goodbye’. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 So, my interpretation of what you say, is my translation of what you said. I suppose it can also be a "scare quote" at the same time it is also a "translation quote". Therefore, woody, you are wrong, and your complaint is self-serving, obviously, but still, invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 sure thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.