Billy wrote:

The point of this thread, which was started by Steve Peek was,
"If you have any interest in heirloom apples (you know, the ugly ones
that
taste unbelievably good) you have to check out:

It may have started with a tour of heirloom apples, but he later
threw in the fact that he never sprays his apples.

http://www.bighorsecreekfarm.com/ . They have over 300 varieties. I'm
gonna
need more land."
Steve

You know ugly, Doo, I'm sure. I would guess that Steve was referring to
unsprayed apples, that may not be cosmetically perfect.
You were the one who veered into biocides to make your apples
"Photoshop ready". Steve was just luxuriating in the abundance of apple
varieties.

I am not speaking about surface damage. If you look at the
following web site, you will see some pictures of apple maggot
damaged fruit:
http://gardening.wsu.edu/library/tree002/tree002.htm

This gardening site plainly states the following:
"Fruit damaged by apple maggots eventually becomes soft and
rotten, and cannot be eaten"

I would not even use these attacked apples for cider, unless you
need a protein fix.



Why don't you have another steaming cup of Imidan to settle your nerves?

That's not even funny.

Billygoat,

You obviously know nothing about fruit growing, so why not stick to
one of your specialties, like carrots.


Yoo probably think that all apples taste the same and probably fool
yourself into thinking Gallo wine is as tasty as a French Chardoney.
I am not trying to be snobish here, but pointing out that I take
extra pains to grow finer apples, and that involves chemical
spraying. As I have mentioned many times, I have the advantage of
controlling the spray management to keep the dangers negligible.
You, on the other hand, put out lots of unsubstanciated data of how
poisonous our fruits and vegitables are. The net effect of this is
to unnecessarily scare people into not eating foods which will have
a net effect of making them more healthy. Even store bought fruit
and vegitables can be made safer by proper washing or peeling. You
probably don't realize that many foods in the market marked as
Organic are not necessarily free of chemicals. I have heard of
organic farmers approaching their neighbors when their crops are
about to be ruined, asking for advice on how to spray with chemicals
to save their livelihood. Also consider that some of the organic
sprays contain nature's most toxic chemicals. It's a self-defense
mechanism plants have. Rotenone, for example can be toxic. So
don't lecture me about your philosophy of saving the planet. I
think you are doing more harm than good in your warnings.

Sherwin

In article ,
sherwin dubren wrote:

Billy wrote:

The point of this thread, which was started by Steve Peek was,
"If you have any interest in heirloom apples (you know, the ugly ones
that
taste unbelievably good) you have to check out:

It may have started with a tour of heirloom apples, but he later
threw in the fact that he never sprays his apples.

http://www.bighorsecreekfarm.com/ . They have over 300 varieties. I'm
gonna
need more land."
Steve

You know ugly, Doo, I'm sure. I would guess that Steve was referring to
unsprayed apples, that may not be cosmetically perfect.
You were the one who veered into biocides to make your apples
"Photoshop ready". Steve was just luxuriating in the abundance of apple
varieties.

I am not speaking about surface damage. If you look at the
following web site, you will see some pictures of apple maggot
damaged fruit:
http://gardening.wsu.edu/library/tree002/tree002.htm

This gardening site plainly states the following:
"Fruit damaged by apple maggots eventually becomes soft and
rotten, and cannot be eaten"

I would not even use these attacked apples for cider, unless you
need a protein fix.



Why don't you have another steaming cup of Imidan to settle your nerves?

That's not even funny.

Billygoat,

You obviously know nothing about fruit growing, so why not stick to
one of your specialties, like carrots.


Yoo probably think that all apples taste the same and probably fool
yourself into thinking Gallo wine is as tasty as a French Chardoney.
I am not trying to be snobish here, but pointing out that I take
extra pains to grow finer apples, and that involves chemical
spraying. As I have mentioned many times, I have the advantage of
controlling the spray management to keep the dangers negligible.
You, on the other hand, put out lots of unsubstanciated data of how
poisonous our fruits and vegitables are. The net effect of this is
to unnecessarily scare people into not eating foods which will have
a net effect of making them more healthy. Even store bought fruit
and vegitables can be made safer by proper washing or peeling. You
probably don't realize that many foods in the market marked as
Organic are not necessarily free of chemicals. I have heard of
organic farmers approaching their neighbors when their crops are
about to be ruined, asking for advice on how to spray with chemicals
to save their livelihood. Also consider that some of the organic
sprays contain nature's most toxic chemicals. It's a self-defense
mechanism plants have. Rotenone, for example can be toxic. So
don't lecture me about your philosophy of saving the planet. I
think you are doing more harm than good in your warnings.

Sherwin

The problem is Doo, you don't think. The choice is eat chemicals or
don't eat chemicals. No one knows what the chemicals do, especially in
combination, so, which is it, door number one, or door number two?
There are reports saying it is OK, and there are reports that it is
poison. What is your pick?
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html

Billy wrote:

The problem is Doo, you don't think. The choice is eat chemicals or
don't eat chemicals. No one knows what the chemicals do, especially in
combination, so, which is it, door number one, or door number two?
There are reports saying it is OK, and there are reports that it is
poison. What is your pick?

Billygoat,

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

Dr. Schwarcz puts things in perspective about the use of pesticides.
He agrees that they can be harmfull to growers and farmworkers, if
they are not taking the right precautions. However, he does not
think there are any real dangers to the consumer public. It is a
matter of quantity of pesticide in the resultant produce. He
emphasizes that chemicals are used in much lower quantities and
under more careful scrutiny than in the past. I suggest you get
a hold of a copy at your local library. Be sure to read the chapter
on pesticides.

Sherwin

In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:58:18 -0500, sherwin dubren
wrote:

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

As you posted to "anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world" I think it's OK to
jump in here. I will read his book if you will agree to read the
following:

Who funds Scwarcz?

A consortium of biotechnology companies, under the umbrella of
the Council for Biotechnology Information.

From the CBI website:

http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=about
Welcome to whybiotech.com®.

The Council for Biotechnology Information communicates science-based
information about the benefits and safety of agricultural and food
biotechnology. Its members are the leading biotechnology companies and
trade associations.

Member Companies and Associations
http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=982

Monsanto
BASF
Bayer
Biotechnology Industry Organization
CropLife America
Dow
DuPont
Syngenta

That certainly seems to be a bit of conflict of interest, doesn't it?

Not to worry Steve. I am sure those folks understand the complexities
of the world we live in and really really want to provide us with a
secure food machine just as long as they (*******s) control it.

Bill who wonders why wisdom is not appreciated but knowledge is?

--
Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA

Not all who wander are lost.
- J.R.R. Tolkien (1892-1973)

In article ,
Bill who putters wrote:

In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:58:18 -0500, sherwin dubren
wrote:

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

As you posted to "anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world" I think it's OK to
jump in here. I will read his book if you will agree to read the
following:

Who funds Scwarcz?

A consortium of biotechnology companies, under the umbrella of
the Council for Biotechnology Information.

From the CBI website:

http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=about
Welcome to whybiotech.com®.

The Council for Biotechnology Information communicates science-based
information about the benefits and safety of agricultural and food
biotechnology. Its members are the leading biotechnology companies and
trade associations.

Member Companies and Associations
http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=982

Monsanto
BASF
Bayer
Biotechnology Industry Organization
CropLife America
Dow
DuPont
Syngenta

That certainly seems to be a bit of conflict of interest, doesn't it?

Not to worry Steve. I am sure those folks understand the complexities
of the world we live in and really really want to provide us with a
secure food machine just as long as they (*******s) control it.

Bill who wonders why wisdom is not appreciated but knowledge is?

Sort of like the comparison of clever and smart.

Mankind had to be very clever to build a bomb that could kill the
human race, but that wasn't very smart of them, was it?
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html

In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:58:18 -0500, sherwin dubren
wrote:

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

As you posted to "anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world" I think it's OK to
jump in here. I will read his book if you will agree to read the
following:

Who funds Scwarcz?

A consortium of biotechnology companies, under the umbrella of
the Council for Biotechnology Information.

From the CBI website:

http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=about
Welcome to whybiotech.com®.

The Council for Biotechnology Information communicates science-based
information about the benefits and safety of agricultural and food
biotechnology. Its members are the leading biotechnology companies and
trade associations.

Member Companies and Associations
http://www.whybiotech.com/index.asp?id=982

Monsanto
BASF
Bayer
Biotechnology Industry Organization
CropLife America
Dow
DuPont
Syngenta

That certainly seems to be a bit of conflict of interest, doesn't it?

Good research Steve ;O)

This is such a small stone to throw but

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...25731522/?tag=
content;col1

Schwarcz chairs ACCN board.(Canadian Chemical News appointed Joe
Schwarcz)
Canadian Chemical News ,* January, 2006

The Chemical Institute of Canada and ACCN are proud to announce the
appointment of Joe Schwarcz, MCIC, as the new chair of the ACCN
(Canadian Chemical News) Editorial Board.
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html

Billy wrote:
In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:58:18 -0500, sherwin dubren
wrote:

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

I don't mind you jumping in. I don't think that any of the Order of
Organics will even look at his book. He has been dammed by
association. Well, I bought his book yesterday after reading a
library copy. I have seen too much of the organic fanaticism,
so his book was a breath of fresh air. You people walk around
with blinders, refusing to consider other sides of this issue.

You blast Monsanto for destroying the planet, yet how many people
do you think would go hungry or starve, if not for the chemicals
they have developed. When organics can demonstrate that they can
feed the world without chemicals, I would among the first to sign on.
When I can find an organic spray that will protect my fruit, I will
also be among the first to switch over. Ain't no such things.

I could even have more interest in organics if there weren't so much
hyperbole and exageration coming from your side. I don't believe
half of what is claimed to be contamination by chemicals of our
food supply. By contamination, I mean something that will really
make you sick. Avoiding these food sources does more damage to
the public who are scared silly by these way exagerated claims.

Note: Billygoat need not answer. He does not have the intelligence
to carry on a civil discussion.

Sherwin

In article ,
sherwin dubren wrote:

Billy wrote:
In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 12:58:18 -0500, sherwin dubren
wrote:

I can recommend a book to you and anyone else interested in a balanced
view of the use of pesticides in today's world. It is written by
Joe schwarcz, Phd, who is the director of the McGill University's
office for Science and Society. He has written many books on health
and this one is called 'An Apple a Day'. I found the entire book to
be of great interest, but you should look specifically at the
chapter on pesticides.

I don't mind you jumping in. I don't think that any of the Order of
Organics will even look at his book. He has been dammed by
association. Well, I bought his book yesterday after reading a
library copy. I have seen too much of the organic fanaticism,
so his book was a breath of fresh air. You people walk around
with blinders, refusing to consider other sides of this issue.

You blast Monsanto for destroying the planet, yet how many people
do you think would go hungry or starve, if not for the chemicals
they have developed. When organics can demonstrate that they can
feed the world without chemicals, I would among the first to sign on.
When I can find an organic spray that will protect my fruit, I will
also be among the first to switch over. Ain't no such things.

I could even have more interest in organics if there weren't so much
hyperbole and exageration coming from your side. I don't believe
half of what is claimed to be contamination by chemicals of our
food supply. By contamination, I mean something that will really
make you sick. Avoiding these food sources does more damage to
the public who are scared silly by these way exagerated claims.

Note: Billygoat need not answer. He does not have the intelligence
to carry on a civil discussion.

Sherwin

A civil discussion with you shit head? Of course I can. It's a easy as
trying to believe Dr. Joe about how benevolent Monsanto's products are,
when they are paying him to be a shill. Can't you read? You are no
longer dealing with facts, you are into some faith based belief.
Jim Jones comes to mind. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown
Whatchew doin' Doo? You some kind of Monsanto zombi? Wake up.
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html

In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 13:49:23 -0700, Billy
wrote:

Good research Steve ;O)

Thanks, but it's always a matter of finding the money trail, as you
already know.

Which raises the question, what did you use for your search criteria?
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html

In article
. easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 14:55:54 -0700, Billy
wrote:

In article
.easynews.com,
Steve wrote:

On Sat, 23 May 2009 13:49:23 -0700, Billy
wrote:

Good research Steve ;O)

Thanks, but it's always a matter of finding the money trail, as you
already know.

Which raises the question, what did you use for your search criteria?

Joseph A. Schwarcz subsidy
Joseph A. Schwarcz funding
Joseph A. Schwarcz advisory
McGill University Office for Science and Society
All of which were pretty much a dead end until
http://www.enviroblog.org/2008/08/
Scroll down and read: "Schwarcz declared EWG’s guide meaningless,
irrelevant, and said the amounts of pesticide on produce are too small
to worry about: "Where is the information that the level of pesticide
contamination that they're talking about has any relevance to humans?”

But when it comes to questions of pesticide safety, Schwarcz has a
clear conflict of interest.

The Office for Science and Society has been funded in part by the
Council for Biotechnology Information. The Council is an agricultural
industry front group whose members are Monsanto, DuPont, Dow
AgroSciences, Bayer CropScience, Syngenta and BASF – all companies
with a vested interest in discrediting information about the health
risks of pesticides. Archived web pages for the Office of Science and
Society list the industry group as a supporter from 2003 until October
2007; now the website acknowledges only funding from “private
parties.”
That led to http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://oss.mcgill.ca/
Opening the July 12, 2007
http://web.archive.org/web/200707121...oss.mcgill.ca/
and scrolling to the bottom produces:
OSS receives support from McGill University, The Lorne Trottier Family
Foundation, The Council for Biotechnology Information and private
donors.

© 2006 Department of Chemistry McGill University

That's your basic bingo, eh?

Good show. The good Dr. also shows up in a minor role at
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar.../26/The-Little
-Known-Secrets-about-Bleached-Flour.aspx

another scary read. Be sure to go in with Firefox and Noscripts on.

Apparently in his book, "That¹s The Way The Cookie Crumbles", Dr.
Schwarcz writes that aspartame is perfectly safe to consume - a verdict
contradicted by scores of independent studies, one that only the insane
could endorse.
--

- Billy
"For the first time in the history of the world, every human being
is now subjected to contact with dangerous chemicals, from the
moment of conception until death." - Rachel Carson

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=En2TzBE0lp4

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1050688.html