----- Original Message -----
From: "Torsten Brinch"
Newsgroups: sci.agriculture
Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 3:00 AM
Subject: German GM wheat trials approved but site sabotaged


: On Fri, 25 Apr 2003 21:49:16 -0500, "Gordon Couger"
: wrote:
:
: The only major concern by farmers about RR wheat is it's marketability.
:
: It should be a major concern to them, if their customers send signals
: of "Don't want it. Don't need it", as reported in the article.
:
: There is no point in growing something that we can't sell.
:
: Exactly. There is a distinct possibility that RR wheat for bread could
: fall in that category.
:
: The green lobby has wandered off coarse
:
: Perhaps from screaming 'The sky is falling' too much?
: Sorry, couldn't resist. :-)
:
: and are trying to block the most
: positive technology we have ever found for the environment
:
: Yeah, speak about hype.
:
: and ill-informed
: believers like Torsten have swallowed their story hook line and sinker.
:
: Shrug. In the discussions we have had you have found me well-informed
: and not at all gullible.
:
: So called green groups that try to block GM crops and promote organic
: farming methods as the answer to the world food problems simple don't
: understand the basics of agriculture.
:
: Otoh, those who would try to block organic farming methods and promote
: GM crops as the answer to the worlds food problems would seem to be
: wildly off, too.
:
: It stands to reason that if GM crops were -the- answer to the worlds
: food problems, we would have no option but to persue it. Reality,
: however, is rather more complex.
:
Torsten,

Crops that use half the CO2 to grow, almost completely stop erosion,
increase organic matter in the soil at a rate of 1% a year for at least 15
years and restore much of the invertebrate and microbiolical organisms to
the soil and in the case of BT cotton can put a dent in 25% of the
insecticide used in the world have a great deal more effect than organic
farming.

In 1900 Europe was on the verge of starvation using organic farming method
because of the British blockade of Chilean nitrate. AFAIK very little has
changed in the last hundred years except organic farmer sponge insect
control off their neighbors who control their bugs. They had a great deal
more manure then than we do now. There is not enonough manure in the world
to produce over 50 % of the food we need and then only if it put on the
feild with no loss. From the time it leave the cow, pig, chicken or horses
bacteria are betaking it down and releasing ammonia into the air. If it
weathers for 6 month over the winter the is very little nitrogen in it.

For some one that is such a prolific poster to ag.science I find it odd that
you can manage to control you pest well enough to grow an organic garden.
Most of us here have some experience in razing corps and don't draw our
experiance from web pages and articles.

The time I tried to explain the inefficiency of the protein/nitrogen cycle
and you tried to use a loss system use only nitrogen in its element form
made it plain you had no idea what is involved in the way nutrients move in
the environment.

You can study all you want about farming but if you study crap you learn
carp.

Remember I was raised using organic methods and still rotate my crops with
legumes at a higher rate than most organic operation becase alfalfa is my
number 1 dryland crop. It won't do the job except in very special cases and
it doesn't do them well because of the added labor. Farm labor is not of
value to a countries economy. They need to be contributing more to the
economy that a human weeding machine.

Demark has a little over twice the farm land in the county I was rasied in
and 50 times as much land as the fellow that farms my wife place and 100
time the amount the fellow that farms my place and 20 times as big as the
ranch. You don't look out side you area and don't pay very close attention
to it. I had to point out your constitution to you. Look at the world
outside your window

I don't know about the rest of the farmers on here but my family on both
sides have been in farming and cattle as far back as we can trace them. We
are innovators the try to be the third or forth to try new technology and
learn from the mistakes of others. Unlike you that are content to make the
same mistake over and over on 98% of the Us farmers or more when measured by
land abandoned these methods over 50 years ago.

Since the US and Oz have the only ag research that is really effective in
the world until China's recent entry I am not surprised that the people of
the EU believe anything that they read in the paper.

There is only one way to see what modern farming is and that is in the farm
where they are doing it. Very few journalist get it right. They sure don't
get all the benefits like clean runoff water and increasing organic matter
right.

Either learn something about agriculture or go back to environmental science
where you dunder headed thinking is the norm. Just because you smother an
issue in verbiage it doesn't hide you lack of knowledge of the underlying
process.

Your tiresome whining, endless quotes of scientific garbage followed by
tedious semantic arguments over words is a pain in the ass.

Gordon

Gordon