GMOs are bad!

>GMOs are bad!

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrobacterium_tumefaciens
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Explain this image


Its not necessarily GMO's that are bad, it's ingesting a plant that grew up in a pesticide bath

those were watermelons, corn, bananas, eggplans, carrots, and cabbages in their wild form before ancient humans started inbreeding them (aka manipulating their genetic line) for better results (aka what they are today)

But the process of selective breeding isn't considered a GMO.

Genetic manipulation isn't even remotely close to GMO's.

Not that they're inherently bad, but this is a very poor comparison.

That's not only GMO.
Human selection is also at stakes.
They didn't have GMO in the 1800s but their fruits looked the same as ours. [spoiler]Well, they put theirs in asylum but you get it[/spoiler]

>flowersinIsrael.com

Nice try merchant

you must be a retard

>bacteria doesn't attack and degrade it
>insects don't eat it
>everything that isn't human, avoids it like wildfire

It's safe to eat it goym!

Also
>its seeds cannot be planted for the next season
>become entirely depended on that company which produces these seeds for food
>must buy the seeds every year

Idiots

It's GMO.

Inserting and rearranging new genes in freaky ass high-polyploidy plant genomes is a very good comparison. Plants do this by themselves, of course, but very early on in agriculture people discovered cool shit like self-pollenization, cloning, grafting. Having a human direct this process to accomplish specific goals is really the same thing as transgenics. It's how the common cultivars of bananas lost their seeds and became a monoculture (the common one, Cavendish, is all the same individual).

The only difference is the 'trans'-genic modifications, instead of cis-genic. There's no reason to assume cisgenic recombination and hybridization that happens of it's own is for some reason more safe than specifically engineered transgenes.

There is 100% nothing wrong with GMOs.

GMO crops require far less pesticides than organic crops desu.

> No, organic does not mean "no pesticides"

I work for those companies so buy up and I get a big bonus mate

The process of GM is fine.

The problem is when companies TM a plant and sue people for growing it.

it's pretty neat how many vegetables came about from one single plant: the wild cabbage.

If greenhouse gases are so powerful, why do we still need to build houses around the gases?

GMO's themselves aren't bad. It's the pesticides that they use on them and the concept of 1 year terminal death seeds that took me a bit to understand

Fuck off monsanto. Who has put insect genes into corn before your company?

The issue of GMO's is fundamentally a math problem.

On the one side, you have GMO foods that feed a given number of people. Yields go up, and more people can be fed.

Take away GMO's and fertilizers and pesticides and insecticides, and yields will go down. This means that the number of people who can be fed declines, so more people will starve.

Pick one side of the equation.

Selective breeding and genetic modification are not the same thing. Just like the Falkland Islands and Argentina are not the same thing.

Well to be fair, if we are to use GMOs, then infertile seeds are pretty much mandatory to prevent them from leaking into the wild. The consequences of that could be potentially catastrophic.

Not all GMO's are bad.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice

Farmers never replant seeds anyway. Even if they aren't GMO. Trust me, I live in rural Missouri, the state where Monsanto is headquartered.

youtube.com/watch?v=N6_DbVdVo-k

EAT YOUR HEALTHY GMOS, GOYIM!

THIS GUY THINKS PESTICIDES ARE GMO

If gmos aren't bad, why does Monsatan astroturf the entire internet to convince people?

Genetic modification is used because some areas are requiring incredibly large amounts of pesticide use. Brazil, for example, has terrible pest problems because they don't have a winter.

>bacteria doesn't attack and degrade it
What?
>insects don't eat it
No, they try to eat it and they fucking DIE because they insert a resistance gene that fucking kills the specific pest.
>everything that isn't human, avoids it like wildfire
Not true

Also
>its seeds cannot be planted for the next season
>become entirely depended on that company which produces these seeds for food
>must buy the seeds every year
You made the same point three times.
H Y B R I D S D O N T B R E E D T R U E
THE FARMERS PLANT HYBRID SEED TO EXPLOIT HETEROSIS YOU FUCKING MONGOL.
Farmers haven't been using their own seed in western countries for literal decades. They buy from these companies because the companies are very effective at both conventional plant breeding and GM.

Didn't stop Greenpeace from destroying fields multiple times.

The Organic label is pretty worthless IMHO. It doesn't mean what people think it means.

>everyone who disagrees with me is a shill.

Have you been on normie social media? They all hate Monsanto. Monsanto has a team of people working to shill for them online and they haven't been able to do shit for the company's image.

Greenpeace is fucking retarded.

>Let's deface the fucking Nazca lines!

Honestly, with very few exceptions, traditional plant husbandry is just better than Genetic Modification. Mostly GMOs are just used to breed in a kill switch that goes off unless an agent is introduced so that they can prevent other farmers from getting their hands on their breed of crop.

But GMOs aren't bad but people let the media convince them they are.

>used to breed in a kill switch
Sorry, mixed my wording a little. "used to splice in a kill switch"

This

My dad is a farmer and he says he sprays more shit on the organic stuff then he does his normal stuff.

>But the process of selective breeding isn't considered a GMO.
Despite selective breeding being the genetic modification of the organism.

THIS SO MUCH

Shill faggot.

Selective breeding is not fucking Gene replacement.

why can't you grow potatoes like weeds in your backyard yet. why does the shit that grows fast have to be shitty shit.

>Selective breeding is not fucking Gene replacement.
The term is GMO not GRO.

If anything, paying double for your precious organic foods is succumbing to the jew

We're talking about Genetic Modification, not Genetic Replacement. Don't move the goalposts.

>selective breeding and hybridization is the same thing as bombarding embryos with copies of exogenous genes
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun
you should really at least google it before spouting off about scientific topics like an ignorant pleb

Most tards buy organic for either three reasons

1) they believe no pesticides are used (kek)

2) they convince themselves they are morally better since they believe they are saving the world

3) they have no thoughts of their own and let the media control what they purchase

>1 post by this ID

>hippies would rather eat food that has literally been poisoned than eat food that scientists spent billions of dollars developing so they produce the maximum amount of nutrients for us

LMAO

Exogenous gene transfer occurs in nature on a regular basis Mostly due to viruses mostly, but there are even fucking bacteria which do this shit in nature.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrobacterium_tumefaciens

Selective breeding is NOT Gene Modification. It's farming (or, more specifically, husbandry). No one but that one weird guy who never wears shoes believes that plants just popped out of the ground perfected. Stop re-defining terms.

If that helps you sleep at night, okay.

>breeding is the same as splicing fish genes into plants

Selective breeding through man is considered GMO, leaf.

Sauce?

The end effect of both is to change the genetic makeup of the plant.

How is that not genetic modification?

He is making reference to a test to see if you could cross genes from plants to animals. It was never more than a research project.

>Picking the sweetest, most bountiful crops for seed
>Splicing genes for botulinum toxin into corn
>Believing this is somehow comparable
>2016

Nigga

>Genetically modifying an organism is not genetically organizing an organism
>It only counts if it fits my cartooney vision of evil hunchback scientists injecting poisons into food and putting it on shelves with a gigantic nosed ceo laughing maniacally while riding around in his limo made of literally $100 bills
I'm not saying Monsanto and such are good, because they sure as shit aren't, but you're also fucking retarded

>paying double for your precious organic foods

Paying? For plants, roots, and twigs? How blue-pilled do you think I am? I grow my own garden and store vegetables for year-round personal use.

Fuck this. When was the last time some gardener was able to put a strain of another organism into a carrot, deprived from a jellyfish, to better withstand some toxins?
This comparison doesn't hold up.

>being this deluded

Go drown in kool-aid, cumstain.

I'll stop redefining terms when the list of sexualities goes back down to two.

Oh I see, you're retarded.

go away Ilan you fucking idiot

Ebin man. Have fun with all that time spent tending to your garden

no, selective breeding isn't GMO. nobody thinks that but you and your vocabulary dosent make your nonsense persuasive. opinion discarded.

Come back when you can gmo argentinians to be white

>he thinks selective breeding and genetic modification are the same thing

Fucking shills.

lots of kikes and niggers and spics itt

>not a single argument against GMOs other than "l-le frankenfood!!"
>people who think GMO = monsanto

Nice to see that Sup Forums is on the same level of vegan numales

Doing so and letting the natural process do its work over a thousand generations is not the same as using bacteria to inject genes to allow a plant to become immune to a herbicide.

GMO is fucking cancer, there is a reason we Jews do not eat it.

Stupid fucking Goyim.

SAVAGE

>is not the same
The process is different but the outcome is comparable.

it's shame about those bananas. the seeds ruin them, but they taste so much better

this. shamefully we have turned over traditional practices, which were MORE productive per acre, healthier, and sustainable - actually improving the land with time - in favor of the invasive parasitic jew that is agribusiness.

Did they actually do this?!

>immune to a herbicide.

>Higher yield over time


If you are actually this stupid, you deserve whats coming.

Do you think that in time you couldn't breed or just have natural selection create a plant that's resistant to herbicides?

>Sup Forums intellectuals

because the term genetic modification implies genetic engineering and specifically excludes selective breeding. it would be completely incorrect to call your heirloom chicken brood "genetically modified". your definition of "genetic modification" would include all forms of natural evolution and degeneration of DNA, including aging and getting a sunburn. you better put on your sunblock or you'll get genetically modified!

If you oppose GMOs, then you're literally greenpeace-tier.

Of course, eventually just like the weeds roaming around that we cannot kill anymore.

Nature finds a way. The entire concept is fucking retarded and is causing cancer. So keep eating your peasant food Goyim enjoy your bowel cancer.

>the concept of 1 year terminal death seeds
What's that?

GMO and trans-genic are different things
People against gmo's without knowing basic biology is why we can't have nice things

>because the term genetic modification implies genetic engineering and specifically excludes selective breeding

Selective breeding is genetic engineering.
I see no reason why the term genetic modification excludes the first successful means of genetic engineering; selective breeding.

>Of course, eventually just like the weeds roaming around that we cannot kill anymore.
So in other worlds you are 100% correct but I'm still going to be a bitch about it?

These semantics are retarded. You're truly falseflagging if you're seriously trying to argue that selective breeding is anywhere close to what jewsanto does

>leaf intellectuals
>leaf in charge of hitting repeating digits
Flush yourself

Does the method matter?

That's what's being argued for, and is full retard.

>ITT people againts GMOs but demand cheap and good looking food at the supermarket

Selective breeding allows nature to take its course and we simply allow what we don't like to die.
GMO refers to the direct modification of genes using a "scientific" technique, for a lack of better words.

We were able to do selective breeding for thousands of years. We just recently started to use GMO techniques. Understand the difference?

A FUCKING LEAF!

So since we recently started we should stop?

Yup

>Selective breeding allows nature to take its course
No, that's exactly opposite to what it means.

>We were able to do selective breeding for thousands of years.
>We just recently started to use GMO techniques.

Selective breeding is a GMO technique.

>for a lack of better words.
For lack of the proper technical terms because you are both ignorant and lazy. I say lazy because you could look up the correct term in less than 60s.

No. What makes you think that?

Organic is hilarious. Number one seller is also number one non organic seller. Vast majority comes from china.

>No, that's exactly opposite to what it means.
>Selective breeding allows nature to take its course AND WE SIMPLY ALLOW WHAT WE DON'T LIKE TO DIE
Fucking leafs, man.

>I say lazy because you could look up the correct term in less than 60s.
>but I won't do it myself so I'll just pretend like I know it
Okay, leaf.

>We were able to do selective breeding for thousands of years. We just recently started to use GMO techniques.

Strongly implies we shouldn't use those methods simply because we have been using selective breeding for so long.

selective breeding and GMOs are two different things monkey

reported for bait shill troll sliding turk nigger shit

>Cheap Food
>Food produced without GMO, pesticides

Pick one.

>selective breeding and GMOs are two different things monkey
Yeah; one is a method the other is the outcome.

GMOs are just speeding up selective breeding

I'm not against GMOs. People just need to understand the difference between GMOs and selective breeding.

>Herbicides

>Natural

My sides.

Yes, sorry for misunderstanding.

So your argument is in fact 'I'm ignorant of the world and within my limited understanding I'm right and everyone else that does actually know something is wrong.'