Betruger wrote:Do you know for a fact that we understand genetics and epigenetics and everything in that framework to accurately predict what the consequences, if any, will be?
How about when you mix genes roughly at random with selective breeding? Who knows what could happen? Or suppose they irradiated the genetic material in the hopes of a useful variation? Hell, what if natural cosmic rays do it? We are so screwed. Our only hope of salvation is to sacrifice 30 million Africans. Then Nature will forgive our sins and trespasses.
I can relieve your concern. For $20 a month. I will absolve you all relevant sins and guilt. You can leave your burden of sin and guilt with me. For eating genetically modified foods. Is your bread processed with yeasts collected in the wild? Nope. It is some genetically selected and purified mold. Hardly anything we eat these days hasn't been genetically modified or selected by humans. I can see why you are revolted by every bite of food you take. For $20 a month it doesn't have to be that way. And if you get others to join in for $20 a month I'll split the take with you.
M. Simon
Straight People For Gaia Liberation Front and National Religion - Donations Welcome
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I'm just answering his question to follow the argument through.. I don't know myself so I'm agnostic as I am for global warming. I want to see the science and practical results before I take it for granted.
How about when you mix genes roughly at random with selective breeding? Who knows what could happen? Or suppose they irradiated the genetic material in the hopes of a useful variation? Hell, what if natural cosmic rays do it? We are so screwed. Our only hope of salvation is to sacrifice 30 million Africans. Then Nature will forgive our sins and trespasses.
I can relieve your concern. For $20 a month. I will absolve you all relevant sins and guilt. You can leave your burden of sin and guilt with me. For eating genetically modified foods. Is your bread processed with yeasts collected in the wild? Nope. It is some genetically selected and purified mold. Hardly anything we eat these days hasn't been genetically modified or selected by humans. I can see why you are revolted by every bite of food you take. For $20 a month it doesn't have to be that way. And if you get others to join in for $20 a month I'll split the take with you.
M. Simon
Straight People For Gaia Liberation Front and National Religion - Donations Welcome
_________________
Have to say I agree 100% with MSimon on this. Ever see ancestral grains and cereals? Or how about an aurochs? Practically every domestic animal and every major agriculture product we consume today is the result of thousands of years of serious genetic modification.
Betruger wrote:I'm just answering his question to follow the argument through.. I don't know myself so I'm agnostic as I am for global warming. I want to see the science and practical results before I take it for granted.
Ah. The precautionary principle.
Do not get out of bed in the morning because no one can predict all the consequences. Of course if you lay in bed you could get struck by a meteor. I suggest bathroom breaks every 4 hours. Of course you have to be very careful in the bathroom. Once you go in one of them no one can predict all the consequences. And bathrooms are very dangerous places. Especially if they have been genetically modified.
Think of it. When Ben Franklin started studying electricity did he ever in his wildest imagination predict The Gong Show? Or Sienfeld? Or flash mobs? Or the electric chair? Or for that matter battery powered pleasuring devices? Is this what nature intended for us? Of course not. You can never be too careful.
BTW you can send the $20 to me. Contact me by e-mail and I will give you my address plus the secret hand signal so you can make clandestine contact with others who have opted for relief from guilt.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
I'm not sending you anything.. I haven't ever skimped on GMO foods.. I'm just arguing what seems to me to be an assumption with no data. We don't even know how the complete genetic framework operates, or even what its exact constitution is. I'll send you 20$ to figure that out and shed some light on what ought to be a non-issue, but what will then be a certainty instead of an assumption.
I would like to know just once how these guys get their credibility. Is it because they have QD(quack doctor) after their names. Is it because of their limited imaginations when they make stuff up. Is it because they sound good when talk about something they obviously know nothing about. Oh, yes, the guy wrote a book. There just aren't any facts or real statistics in it. Just the usual doom nonsense. After all, not once have I ever seen real evidence from these guys on just about anything. It's all about what might happen. How often do they have to be wrong before nobody pays any attention to them.
Betruger wrote:I'm not sending you anything.. I haven't ever skimped on GMO foods.. I'm just arguing what seems to me to be an assumption with no data. We don't even know how the complete genetic framework operates, or even what its exact constitution is. I'll send you 20$ to figure that out and shed some light on what ought to be a non-issue, but what will then be a certainty instead of an assumption.
But we do have data. Nature has been doing the experiment at random for billions of years with cosmic rays. And the stuff produced gets released to the environment without even a cursory scientific check.
And what about all the x-rays given every year? Do they filter out all the microorganisms from the air before they turn on the x-ray machines? Of course not. What if one of the genetically modified organisms from that process gets in our food? The x-ray technician could be eating a bologna sandwich and die. Or suppose one of the organisms in the air changes the planetary albedo and we all freeze or fry - depending. You have to wonder why people are so unconcerned. Just because we can't trace global warming (or is it cooling) to randomly modified bacteria yet is no proof it isn't happening. We don't know everything.
Something must be done. I suggest a prohibition on cosmic rays and natural radiation, and x-ray machines must be more closely monitored. These uncontrolled genetic experiments must be stopped. At once! For da grater god duvall.
But all that could cost a lot. Just send me the $20 a month. I'll give you peace of mind for less. And if you hang out here I will give you a piece of my mind for nothing.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
Who's making the assumption? What percentage of genetic selection do you suppose will ever be man made? Why do you distrust the very few "guided" selections over the overwhelming number of natural selections that happen under rocks in your backyard every day? What's the basis for suspecting lab mutations are any worse than the "under rock" variety?
Through the green revolution India became a net exporter of food. Dead-in-the water, "sustainable" scientific regression is not green.
God bless the Amish, but a worldwide 21st century analog of them is not the way.
We need better crops, and we need energy sources for massive desalination.
Genetic modification is just one necessary piece of the puzzle.
You guys are getting ahead of yourselves. I have peace of mind already.
I'm only saying that we don't know what mechanisms are in-gear with the custom cogwheels we've added. Do not know. That doesn't mean I'm against GMOs.. Yes they're a necessary piece of the puzzle, the same way stem cells are. Lab-grown slabs of meat for the third world, yep, I'm all for that.
I'm not saying the absence of hints that something's amiss is insufficient guarantee that the changes we've made so far are benign, I'm just saying that in the absence of understanding, you cannot make any statements on what will or won't happen with any certainty. You can treat it like a quiet black box, but you can't pretend to say that the quiet happens because nothing's going on in the black box.
I'll spend my 20$ on a nice GMO steak, thanks for the thought tho MSimon My pov stands. No data, no prediction. Just a blind assumption.
Last edited by Betruger on Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Remember in the '70s and '80s we always heard about the dangers of overpopulation and the malthusian predictions of its outcome? Ever notice that we really don't hear about them now? Do you know why? There are countries that have passed the point of no return and it is politically incorrect to talk about their failure. If Eygyt took its entire GDP and did nothing but bought food and added it to all the food it grows, it is still running a calorie-deficit. Every year it goes deeper in debt to feed its masses. And it is not alone. When a country has a civil war and its people start dying of starvation we say it is because of the war and never the reverse. If we do not act, it WILL get worse. I, however, am an optimist. I think that there is still a chance that technology can rescue us. Maybe not a great chance, but one that is infinitly preferable to its alternatives. Guess what? If we want to solve the problem we had to start years ago. And we did. Now we have to get the salt and drought tolerant GM foods planted in Africa. We have to start recovering burnt out farmland with the nitrogen fixing supercrops. I sometimes think the greenies really want mega-deaths in Africa and desperation fueled wars spreading out across the globe. Sometimes I think that they are just short-sighted or lack empathy. Sometimes I think that they are just stupid. Rachel Carson has killed more people than Hitler and Stalin combined, but because they are mostly in Africa, we just don't care. If engineering teaches us anything, it should teach us to see and fix the problems that exist and not just the problems that are fun to play with.
What is the difference between ignorance and apathy? I don't know and I don't care.
On the subject of the greenie objections to GM foods.
If you don't think that they are safe to eat, don't eat them.
If you think that all the money from them are going to go to Monsanto, don't pay for them.
If you are worried that the genes are going to jump species, Don't worry as it is beyond me how this is bad from your point of view. Native species (weeds) can suddenly compete? Monsanto's IP becomes worthless? We get more nitrogen-fixing plants in the environment? Really, where is the problem?
What is the difference between ignorance and apathy? I don't know and I don't care.
I'm only saying that we don't know what mechanisms are in-gear with the custom cogwheels we've added. Do not know.
And we know even less about what nature is up to.
Ultraviolet light can cause genetic variations. You know - skin cancer is one sign of that.
Now exactly how many uncontrolled genetic experiments are going on every day? Now compare that with scientists working in a Level 4 facility. Or even a Level 2.
I'd like to see some numbers - even made up ones (I can critique those) - of the level of the hazard. We have been running the experiment for 20 years on a population of well over 200 million. With that big an experiment for that long even things that take a long time to show up will begin showing up in the more susceptible.
Then I'd like to see some real numbers about other hazards. Like starvation in Africa.
And suppose it takes 20 more years for the bad stuff to show up? Think of what kind of tools we will have in 20 years to fix stuff.
So you know. I'm an engineer. I have to make practical decisions. Show me the numbers.
As to worry about "we don't know what will happen". Atomic war, instability caused by hunger, and the political destruction of the American economy seem like more immediate threats.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
pfrit wrote:Remember in the '70s and '80s we always heard about the dangers of overpopulation and the malthusian predictions of its outcome? Ever notice that we really don't hear about them now? .
Carrying capacity is what its called now. Please update your bookmarks.
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.
pfrit wrote:Remember in the '70s and '80s we always heard about the dangers of overpopulation and the malthusian predictions of its outcome? Ever notice that we really don't hear about them now? .
Carrying capacity is what its called now. Please update your bookmarks.
At what level of technology will carrying capacity be computed? Will the calculations be better or worse than those the IPCC uses to determine if CO2 is actually changing the climate? (all unknown sources of positive temperature variation will be imputed to CO2).
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.
My pov stands. No data, no prediction. Just a blind assumption.