In article ,
Roy wrote:

Tiny doses of a lot of products increase your risk of cancer. Big deal
...sunlight will do the same thing and I'm not staying inside my cave
and not venture forth.
Roundup IS relatively safe from ALL that I have read.
If small amounts increase the chance of cancer in rats then DON'T
FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.

You obviously have done little reading, which only burnishes your
anti-rationalism and ignorance, which you seem to think is a badge of
honor.

No lifetime feeding studies were done on glypho$ate. None.
We don't know what it can do.
We are the Guinea pigs.

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php

http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx800218n

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Pusztai

--
Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg
or
E Pluribus Unum
Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running

On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:08:36 AM UTC-6, Billy wrote:
In article ,

Roy wrote:



Tiny doses of a lot of products increase your risk of cancer. Big deal

...sunlight will do the same thing and I'm not staying inside my cave

and not venture forth.

Roundup IS relatively safe from ALL that I have read.

If small amounts increase the chance of cancer in rats then DON'T

FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.



You obviously have done little reading, which only burnishes your

anti-rationalism and ignorance, which you seem to think is a badge of

honor.



No lifetime feeding studies were done on glypho$ate. None.

We don't know what it can do.

We are the Guinea pigs.



http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php



http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx800218n



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Pusztai



--

Welcome to the New America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg

or

E Pluribus Unum

Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running

You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.

As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

On Sunday, September 23, 2012 6:35:37 PM UTC-6, Roy wrote:
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:08:36 AM UTC-6, Billy wrote:

In article ,



Roy wrote:







Tiny doses of a lot of products increase your risk of cancer. Big deal



...sunlight will do the same thing and I'm not staying inside my cave



and not venture forth.



Roundup IS relatively safe from ALL that I have read.



If small amounts increase the chance of cancer in rats then DON'T



FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.







You obviously have done little reading, which only burnishes your



anti-rationalism and ignorance, which you seem to think is a badge of



honor.







No lifetime feeding studies were done on glypho$ate. None.



We don't know what it can do.



We are the Guinea pigs.







http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php







http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx800218n







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Pusztai







--



Welcome to the New America.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg



or



E Pluribus Unum



Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala



http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running



You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.



As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian

thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or

early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great

product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant

varieties, I question.

I meant "throw" instead of "through" in my reply. Just a wee bit of an
error. May Gawd forgive me.

"Roy" wrote in message
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:08:36 AM UTC-6, Billy wrote:
In article ,

Roy wrote:



Tiny doses of a lot of products increase your risk of cancer. Big deal

...sunlight will do the same thing and I'm not staying inside my cave

and not venture forth.

Roundup IS relatively safe from ALL that I have read.

If small amounts increase the chance of cancer in rats then DON'T

FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.



You obviously have done little reading, which only burnishes your

anti-rationalism and ignorance, which you seem to think is a badge of

honor.



No lifetime feeding studies were done on glypho$ate. None.

We don't know what it can do.

We are the Guinea pigs.



http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php



http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx800218n



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Pusztai



--

Welcome to the New America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg

or

E Pluribus Unum

Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running

You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.

As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same thing as a
'lifetime feeding study'.

In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same thing as a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade) affect
the application by farmers of Roundup.

"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with
it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same thing as
a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade) affect
the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct of such a
study.

Farm1 wrote:
"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass
with it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August
or early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a
great product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR
resistant varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same
thing as a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade)
affect the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct of
such a study.

If you want to read some really scary stuff about the politicising and abuse
of science and studies have a look at "The republican war on science" or
better still, because it is wider in scope and not directed so much at one
party "The merchants of doubt". My old mate Fred Singer appears in a
star-studded lineup. These are both USA-centred but especially in the
latter the authors show how this kind of corruption has consequences that go
around the world.

We have seen some attempts to import some of this bilge (as if we don't have
enough home grown idiots) where Brendan Nelson incautiously started sucking
on the teat of Intelligent Design (AKA Creationism).

D

"David Hare-Scott" wrote in message
...
Farm1 wrote:
"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass
with it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August
or early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a
great product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR
resistant varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same
thing as a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade)
affect the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct of
such a study.

If you want to read some really scary stuff about the politicising and
abuse of science and studies have a look at "The republican war on
science" or better still, because it is wider in scope and not directed so
much at one party "The merchants of doubt". My old mate Fred Singer
appears in a star-studded lineup. These are both USA-centred but
especially in the latter the authors show how this kind of corruption has
consequences that go around the world.

Thanks David, I will, but no doubt will end up totally depressed at the end
of my reaidng.

We have seen some attempts to import some of this bilge (as if we don't
have enough home grown idiots) where Brendan Nelson incautiously started
sucking on the teat of Intelligent Design (AKA Creationism).

I'd forgotten about that! Yes, very disturbing. Mind you, I find Abbott
even far more disturbing than a whole boat load and any number of other
conservative politicans put together.

In article , times says...
"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with
it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same thing as
a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade) affect
the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct of such a
study.

Hi Farm1,

How's the weather in upside-down land?

Given the trend and sensibility of my Canadian countryman's comments,
the thought I presented seemed a logical enough addition to the thread.

phorbin wrote:
In article , times says...
"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times
says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass
with it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August
or early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a
great product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR
resistant varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same
thing as a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade)
affect the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct
of such a study.

Hi Farm1,

How's the weather in upside-down land?

Trending dry all over the east but not yet a serious problem, some of North
NSW and south QLD are declared "marginal" though the models are predicting
wetter than median in those areas next quarter. The BOM is equivocating
whether we will have an El Nino summer. I have had one good shower of rain
in 9 weeks, due to the wonders of the Big Subterranean Sponge the pasture
has spring growth but if there is no rain soon that will brown off pretty
soon.

David

"phorbin" wrote in message
...
In article , times says...
"phorbin" wrote in message
In article , times says...


As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass
with
it
and it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The application, by farmers, of Roundup to weeds is not the same thing
as
a
'lifetime feeding study'.

Though a lifetime feeding study should the study be replicable will
probably (after Monsanto has pretended that the studies are flawed,
hammered it with PR droppings and dragged its feet for a decade) affect
the application by farmers of Roundup.

Indeed. But then that would be the whole point behind the conduct of
such a
study.

Hi Farm1,

How's the weather in upside-down land?

You're not familiar with McArthurs Universal Corrective Map of the World?

Given the trend and sensibility of my Canadian countryman's comments,
the thought I presented seemed a logical enough addition to the thread.

It was indeed logical, which is why I agreed with you.

In article ,
Roy wrote:

On Sunday, September 23, 2012 9:08:36 AM UTC-6, Billy wrote:
In article ,

Roy wrote:



Tiny doses of a lot of products increase your risk of cancer. Big deal

...sunlight will do the same thing and I'm not staying inside my cave

and not venture forth.

Roundup IS relatively safe from ALL that I have read.

If small amounts increase the chance of cancer in rats then DON'T

FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.



You obviously have done little reading, which only burnishes your

anti-rationalism and ignorance, which you seem to think is a badge of

honor.



No lifetime feeding studies were done on glypho$ate. None.

We don't know what it can do.

We are the Guinea pigs.



http://www.i-sis.org.uk/glyphosatePoisonsCrops.php



http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx800218n



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arpad_Pusztai



--

Welcome to the New America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg

or

E Pluribus Unum

Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/1...l_stein_runnin
g

You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.

When you say things like, "If small amounts increase the chance of
cancer in rats then DON'T FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.", you can
expect to be consigned to a playpen.

Ignorance can be cured, stupidity, can't.

As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it and
it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The occasional application to an isolated problem, may have merit, but
in wholesale use for weeding crops, you are damaging the topsoil, which
in the long run we will need top grow post industrial crops. Presently,
it takes more than a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce a calorie
of food; before the advent of chemical fertilizer a farm produced more
than two calories of food energy for every calorie of energy invested.
Interplanting will grow more food than monocultures. For this more labor
intensive agriculture, you need the ecology of topsoil.

--
Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg
or
E Pluribus Unum
Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running

Billy wrote:
Roy wrote:
....
You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.

*hahahaha*


When you say things like, "If small amounts increase the chance of
cancer in rats then DON'T FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.", you can
expect to be consigned to a playpen.

Ignorance can be cured, stupidity, can't.

and the fact that reality doesn't care if you
are stupid and/or ignorant, if in the end you
poison your environment enough that it can no
longer sustain life then you and/or your children
are history.



As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it and
it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian
thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or
early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great
product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant
varieties, I question.

The occasional application to an isolated problem, may have merit,

if it is either occasional or isolated it could be dealt
with in another manner. growing taller perennial cover
crops, not mowing too short, hand weeding, targeted grazing
by goats, ...


but
in wholesale use for weeding crops, you are damaging the topsoil, which
in the long run we will need top grow post industrial crops.

besides the fact that monoculture farming
wastes a lot of productivity because the land
is left bare for long periods of time along
with erosion of the topsoil.


Presently,
it takes more than a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce a calorie
of food; before the advent of chemical fertilizer a farm produced more
than two calories of food energy for every calorie of energy invested.

this equation begins to shift with the introduction
of solar and wind energy into the mix. that at least
is a small improvement, but i still agree that the
adding of chemical fertilizers without improving the
soil overall is going to still be a problem. it burns
the organic matter out of the soil very quickly.


Interplanting will grow more food than monocultures. For this more labor
intensive agriculture, you need the ecology of topsoil.

i think the problem is much more than damage
to the soil, i think there is a lack in studies
which track the effects of the gene fragments
inserted into food plants. how those fragments
are digested, if they can start an allergic
or other autoimmune response in people before
they reach the stomach and intestines, if they
affect the digestive tract microbes, etc.

one mention in recent news that made me think of
the law of unintended side effects -- about how
GMO crops have tougher stalks which requires machines
to get new/harder/different tires more often (some
farmers have their tires baked to harden them) that
chopping blades wear out faster, etc.


songbird

On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:46:26 AM UTC-6, songbird wrote:
Billy wrote:

Roy wrote:

...

You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.



*hahahaha*





When you say things like, "If small amounts increase the chance of

cancer in rats then DON'T FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.", you can

expect to be consigned to a playpen.



Ignorance can be cured, stupidity, can't.



and the fact that reality doesn't care if you

are stupid and/or ignorant, if in the end you

poison your environment enough that it can no

longer sustain life then you and/or your children

are history.







As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with it and

it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian

thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or

early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great

product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant

varieties, I question.



The occasional application to an isolated problem, may have merit,



if it is either occasional or isolated it could be dealt

with in another manner. growing taller perennial cover

crops, not mowing too short, hand weeding, targeted grazing

by goats, ...





but

in wholesale use for weeding crops, you are damaging the topsoil, which

in the long run we will need top grow post industrial crops.



besides the fact that monoculture farming

wastes a lot of productivity because the land

is left bare for long periods of time along

with erosion of the topsoil.





Presently,

it takes more than a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce a calorie

of food; before the advent of chemical fertilizer a farm produced more

than two calories of food energy for every calorie of energy invested.



this equation begins to shift with the introduction

of solar and wind energy into the mix. that at least

is a small improvement, but i still agree that the

adding of chemical fertilizers without improving the

soil overall is going to still be a problem. it burns

the organic matter out of the soil very quickly.





Interplanting will grow more food than monocultures. For this more labor

intensive agriculture, you need the ecology of topsoil.



i think the problem is much more than damage

to the soil, i think there is a lack in studies

which track the effects of the gene fragments

inserted into food plants. how those fragments

are digested, if they can start an allergic

or other autoimmune response in people before

they reach the stomach and intestines, if they

affect the digestive tract microbes, etc.



one mention in recent news that made me think of

the law of unintended side effects -- about how

GMO crops have tougher stalks which requires machines

to get new/harder/different tires more often (some

farmers have their tires baked to harden them) that

chopping blades wear out faster, etc.

songbird

"
this equation begins to shift with the introduction
of solar and wind energy into the mix. that at least
is a small improvement, but i still agree that the
adding of chemical fertilizers without improving the
soil overall is going to still be a problem. it burns
the organic matter out of the soil very quickly. "

The added chemical fertilizer does not "burn" organic matter out of the soil. Obviously you have never farmed.
Excessive amounts of chemical fertilizers especially anhydrous ammonia may have a deleterious effect on the micro-organisms naturally present in the soil. These micro-organisms are very important to how organic matter breaks down to free up nutrients that plants require.

Farmers who allow oil drilling companies to spread waste drilling mud on their fields are totally unaware of the damage that these muds do to the micro-organisms present in the soil. Nothing grows without these micro-organisms.

In article ,
Roy wrote:

On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:46:26 AM UTC-6, songbird wrote:
Billy wrote:

Roy wrote:

...

You shouldn't through words like "ignorance" around so carelessly.



*hahahaha*





When you say things like, "If small amounts increase the chance of

cancer in rats then DON'T FEED IT TO RATS...problem solved.", you can

expect to be consigned to a playpen.



Ignorance can be cured, stupidity, can't.



and the fact that reality doesn't care if you

are stupid and/or ignorant, if in the end you

poison your environment enough that it can no

longer sustain life then you and/or your children

are history.







As a farmer, I know what RoundUp does. I have sprayed quack grass with
it and

it works well at the recommended rate. Not bad on Canadian

thistle when applied when they are in the rosette stage in August or

early September. When used for its intended purposes it is a great

product. Other activities of Monsanto with breeding of RR resistant

varieties, I question.



The occasional application to an isolated problem, may have merit,



if it is either occasional or isolated it could be dealt

with in another manner. growing taller perennial cover

crops, not mowing too short, hand weeding, targeted grazing

by goats, ...





but

in wholesale use for weeding crops, you are damaging the topsoil, which

in the long run we will need top grow post industrial crops.



besides the fact that monoculture farming

wastes a lot of productivity because the land

is left bare for long periods of time along

with erosion of the topsoil.





Presently,

it takes more than a calorie of fossil fuel energy to produce a calorie

of food; before the advent of chemical fertilizer a farm produced more

than two calories of food energy for every calorie of energy invested.



this equation begins to shift with the introduction

of solar and wind energy into the mix. that at least

is a small improvement, but i still agree that the

adding of chemical fertilizers without improving the

soil overall is going to still be a problem. it burns

the organic matter out of the soil very quickly.





Interplanting will grow more food than monocultures. For this more labor

intensive agriculture, you need the ecology of topsoil.



i think the problem is much more than damage

to the soil, i think there is a lack in studies

which track the effects of the gene fragments

inserted into food plants. how those fragments

are digested, if they can start an allergic

or other autoimmune response in people before

they reach the stomach and intestines, if they

affect the digestive tract microbes, etc.



one mention in recent news that made me think of

the law of unintended side effects -- about how

GMO crops have tougher stalks which requires machines

to get new/harder/different tires more often (some

farmers have their tires baked to harden them) that

chopping blades wear out faster, etc.

songbird

"
this equation begins to shift with the introduction
of solar and wind energy into the mix. that at least
is a small improvement, but i still agree that the
adding of chemical fertilizers without improving the
soil overall is going to still be a problem. it burns
the organic matter out of the soil very quickly. "

The added chemical fertilizer does not "burn" organic matter out of the soil.
Obviously you have never farmed.
Excessive amounts of chemical fertilizers especially anhydrous ammonia may
have a deleterious effect on the micro-organisms naturally present in the
soil. These micro-organisms are very important to how organic matter breaks
down to free up nutrients that plants require.

Farmers who allow oil drilling companies to spread waste drilling mud on
their fields are totally unaware of the damage that these muds do to the
micro-organisms present in the soil. Nothing grows without these
micro-organisms.

And obviously you have never farmed, or you are being overly critical of
the word "burned".

In fields, or in compost, a 25/1 ratio is needed for carbon to nitrogen
to maintain a healthy environment for soil micro-organisms. Injection of
anhydrous ammonia into the soil will encourage bacteria to consume what
organic material as there is. Think of it as "carbs verses protein".
Organic material helps hold water in the soil. Without a carbon/
nitrogen balance of 25/1, bacteria die, leaving less bacterial exudate
to hold the soil together in the face of wind, which leads to erosion.

What kind of farmer are you?

--
Welcome to the New America.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hA736oK9FPg
or
E Pluribus Unum
Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/7/13/green_party_nominee_jill_stein_running