say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
wrote in message s.com... On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 18:21:54 +0100, "Wim Jay" wrote: Wim Your sig is non existent, how come? Well, it's my new computer, you see. I used to have a patch called "QuoteFix" for OE on my old one which gave you a "proper" sig like wot they insist on in demon.local, but I must have cleared the download out one day and I've not yet got round to finding it online again. I'll get there one day. In the meantime I just scribble my forename at the end and it keeps the two madmen happy. The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The distinction is yours to draw... /( )` \ \___ / | /- _ `-/ ' (/\/ \ \ /\ / / | ` \ O O ) / | `-^--'` ' (_.) _ ) / `.___/` / `-----' / ----. __ / __ \ ----|====O)))==) \) /==== ----' `--' `.__,' \ | | \ / ______( (_ / \______ ,' ,-----' | \ `--{__________) \/ I'm a horny devil when riled. Sorry to mention your sig again, but if I reply to you without drawing your attention to your *huge* sig I shall be failing in my duties as a sometimes regular of demon.local, and worse than that, I shall have the sig keepers hot on my heels. There is an excellent FAQ for demon.local which Paul Rooney posts once in a blue moon and that will give you a good guide as to how to behave in here. There's an URL for it but I seem to have lost that too. (Personally, I think it's a very nice sig but don't tell any locals that I said so, please.) Wim |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 18:48:46 +0100, "BAC"
wrote: "Peter Ashby" wrote in message ... snip You get no argument from me on those concerns. In fact I am livid with the likes of Monsanto for jeapardising a potentially very valuable technology with initial products that generally have no benefit for the consumer. I mourn the loss of Flavr Savr tomato paste as a crossfire casualty. I consumed quite a quantity of GM tomato puree, when it was available, and haven't changed into a merman yet :-) So ..... presumably you definitely don't look like this....? http://www.claykeck.com/ethel/ (;-) Regards Geoff |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"Mike Clark" wrote in message ... [snip] However there are other issues behind GM crops that go beyond a simple consideration of the consequences to health. I consider a major point to be the way that laws governing intellectual property rights are used to manipulate commercial interests. The topic under discussion is the possible deleterious effects of GM crops, and not the workings of the capitalist world. Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Paul Rooney" wrote in message ... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 14:21:41 +0100, Reidİ wrote: Following up to Paul Rooney Hang about - GM is good, isn't it? that's very much a matter of opinion isn't it Paul? Efficient crops, disease-resistant veg, etc. Swallowed the hype then? In what way are the crops more efficient? Any evidence that it's bad? Well, The rats eating too many potatoes stuff was rubbish. BUT the real and less exciting aspect is that it allows crops to be sprayed with even more herbicides. There's evidence that thats bad. You are lying in your teeth. Prove me wrong by pointing to any scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has deleterious effects on humans if used correctly. You seem to be assuming that I am talking about the effect on human health. I am not. Then point me to a scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has any deleterious effect on the ecological balance of where it is used, excepting, of course, for the eradication of plants not wanted by humans. Well thats pretty much the nature of what the RSPB complains about. I take it that you don't believe in the efficacy of weeding your garden. It must be a sad, weedy lot. Franz ie. more extreme control and more extreme monoculture. Why bring monoculture into the argument? The use of glyphosate and pursuing a practice of monoculture are separate questions. Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"Peter Ashby" wrote in message ... In article , "Franz Heymann" wrote: "Reidİ" wrote in message ... [snip] Indeed, its a risk, an unquantified one that could have catastrophic results or might not. Nonsense. It is quantified: It is less than can be detected by any experiment so far performed. That makes it compatible with zero to within present experimental limits. To be strict that makes it compatible with zero when comparing GM varieties with equivalent conventional crops, within present experimental limits. It does not exclude some risk which may be shared between the GM and conventional varieties. Point granted. Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"W K" wrote in message ... "Peter Ashby" wrote in message ... In article , "W K" wrote: You are lying in your teeth. Prove me wrong by pointing to any scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has deleterious effects on humans if used correctly. You seem to be assuming that I am talking about the effect on human health. I am not. Then state the things you think are bad about it or shut up. Peter -- Peter Ashby School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland Hmm. rather a narrow thinker if you can only do this in terms of LD50. I see no connection between your riposte and the item which you are answering. Read up on what the RSPB thinks about this issue. Its to do with effects similar to those we already see with increased intensification of farming. A bit vague, are you not? Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
wrote in message s.com... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 16:23:55 +0100, Peter Ashby wrote: In article , bigboard wrote: Peter Ashby wrote: In article , bigboard wrote: Bully for you. What has that got to do with it? What it means is that if you think eating GM might be bad for you then stay away from all conventional crop varieties since we don't know what genetic changes happened to yield the required characters, unlike GM. Also don't eat cauliflower, Brussel sprouts or broccoli, all mutant cabbages. Who knows what genetic sequences caused these? some may have happened because, gasp!, a virus went haywire and disrupted some vital genes. Oh and also stay away from organge carrots, nature meant carrots to be green. I don't think that eating GM crops is necessarily bad for you, so the above paragraph is irrelevant. 1/10 for the patronising attitude, I've seen it done much better. Well since you think that then the first sentence indicates the above was not aimed at you ;-) Peter -- Peter Ashby School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland You taking the **** or what? ha ha ha. what is it you do there, gardening? To assume that I speak for the University of Dundee is to be deluded. If you advertise the fact, then you do, otherwise lose the assosciation. Have they authorised you to talk a load of ******** on their behalf? I look forward to seeing a list of titles of the load of ******** you claim to be talked by Peter. My impression is that you have been very unlucky so far in not being able to win a single argument against him. By the way, in no University worthy of the name is it necessary to obtain permission to speak in public about any matter whatsoever, including your own expertise. Franz Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
wrote in message s.com... On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 16:09:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Paul Rooney" wrote in message ... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 14:21:41 +0100, Reidİ wrote: Following up to Paul Rooney Hang about - GM is good, isn't it? that's very much a matter of opinion isn't it Paul? Efficient crops, disease-resistant veg, etc. Swallowed the hype then? In what way are the crops more efficient? Any evidence that it's bad? Well, The rats eating too many potatoes stuff was rubbish. BUT the real and less exciting aspect is that it allows crops to be sprayed with even more herbicides. There's evidence that thats bad. You are lying in your teeth. Prove me wrong by pointing to any scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has deleterious effects on humans if used correctly. You seem to be assuming that I am talking about the effect on human health. I am not. Then point me to a scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has any deleterious effect on the ecological balance of where it is used, excepting, of course, for the eradication of plants not wanted by humans. That's complete tosh fritz, The name is Franz. It is a better sounding name than your "". How do you pronounce it? Your remark is a certain indication that you have lost steam. why should he, Because I am a scientist and I require scientific evidence if I am to be convinced of the sinfulness of modifying the genes of a plant under controlled conditions rather than by the haphazard style of mother nature. we all know how to drive without seeing the blueprints. Analogies are useless, more often than not. This one is more useless than usual. We read the warnings from the likes of greenpeace and take heed. Many of the issues raised by greenpeace are entirely valid, and have my full support. On the question of GM foodstuffs they are out on a limb with no scientific backup at all. If you have a valid argument against the science I suggest you take it up with the scientists involved & stop boring the pants off us here. I am sorry to hear that your pants are being bored off. You could put an end to it by producing some evidence in favour of your stance. You have not so far produced any scientific statement with any backing whatsoever. Do try, if you wish to carry on further with this Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
wrote in message s.com... On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 16:09:33 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann" wrote: "W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Paul Rooney" wrote in message ... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 14:21:41 +0100, Reidİ wrote: Following up to Paul Rooney Hang about - GM is good, isn't it? that's very much a matter of opinion isn't it Paul? Efficient crops, disease-resistant veg, etc. Swallowed the hype then? In what way are the crops more efficient? Any evidence that it's bad? Well, The rats eating too many potatoes stuff was rubbish. BUT the real and less exciting aspect is that it allows crops to be sprayed with even more herbicides. There's evidence that thats bad. You are lying in your teeth. Prove me wrong by pointing to any scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has deleterious effects on humans if used correctly. You seem to be assuming that I am talking about the effect on human health. I am not. Then point me to a scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has any deleterious effect on the ecological balance of where it is used, excepting, of course, for the eradication of plants not wanted by humans. Still, if you insist fritz. Have a go at this lot, that should keep you busy for ever. My dear , My name is Franz. It is not fritz, as you have now twice demeaned yourself into printing. It is also conventionally spelt with a capital F. Please do not stoop to such poverety stricken methods of arguing. I am snipping the list of papers you gave, in the interest of saving space and bandwidth. If anybody is interested, they may look up the note to which this is a reply. [snip] They seem mostly to concern themselves with the effects of the surfactant in the commercial formulation of glyphosate, and not with the chemical per se. And yet, even those amongst us who are organic gardeners blithely accept the use of soap and household detergents as valid methods of controlling insect attacks. How much research has been done on the possible deleterious effects of those surfactants? Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
wrote in message s.com... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 17:14:51 +0100, Peter Ashby wrote: In article m, "" wrote: Peter Ashby School of Life Sciences, University of Dundee, Scotland You taking the **** or what? ha ha ha. what is it you do there, gardening? Biomedical research, largely on mice, but I have a background in molecular genetics A vivisectionist. It figures. You care as little about animals as you do about humans, money being your goal. Some of us have better standards. And that statement defines you completely. Goodbye. Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"Reidİ" wrote in message ... Following up to Peter Ashby Then stay away from conventional crops then, very far away. Because the uncontrolled genetic changes used in their production must, using your own logic "uncontrolled" genetic changes by selective breeding and crosses with similar plants hardly amounts to components of a fish in a tomato. Rubbish. Mother nature already makes use of a substantial fraction of the components of the genome of a plant to make a fish without our help. Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
"W K" wrote in message ... "Peter Ashby" wrote in message ... In article , "W K" wrote: BUT the real and less exciting aspect is that it allows crops to be sprayed with even more herbicides. There's evidence that thats bad. To whom or what? From an earlier discussion about glyphosate: uh oh another one BTW animals are not plants so the term herbicide might indicate that the toxicity is not directed at animals. Making big assumptions there. Have you any evidence that the assumption is unwarranted? Who on earth has ever suggested that one might treat animals with glyphosate? [snip] Franz |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 21:08:19 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote: "Victoria Clare" wrote in message 8.206... snip We are not a subsistence culture. We do not need to grow GM crops in the UK in order to feed ourselves, or to prevent economic collapse. So, why not be cautious, in the way that so many previous introducers of other plant varieties have not been? Late is better than never. But we produce newly genetically modified potatoes every year or so and have done so since time immemorial.. My neighbour even won a large prize for doing this. -- Martin |
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London
On Wed, 1 Oct 2003 21:08:12 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote: "W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Franz Heymann" wrote in message ... "W K" wrote in message ... "Paul Rooney" wrote in message ... On Wed, 01 Oct 2003 14:21:41 +0100, Reidİ wrote: Following up to Paul Rooney Hang about - GM is good, isn't it? that's very much a matter of opinion isn't it Paul? Efficient crops, disease-resistant veg, etc. Swallowed the hype then? In what way are the crops more efficient? Any evidence that it's bad? Well, The rats eating too many potatoes stuff was rubbish. BUT the real and less exciting aspect is that it allows crops to be sprayed with even more herbicides. There's evidence that thats bad. You are lying in your teeth. Prove me wrong by pointing to any scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has deleterious effects on humans if used correctly. You seem to be assuming that I am talking about the effect on human health. I am not. Then point me to a scientific paper which proves that glyphosate has any deleterious effect on the ecological balance of where it is used, excepting, of course, for the eradication of plants not wanted by humans. Well thats pretty much the nature of what the RSPB complains about. I take it that you don't believe in the efficacy of weeding your garden. It must be a sad, weedy lot. Like you! . . . . . . . . The facts expressed here belong to everybody, the opinions to me. The distinction is yours to draw... /( )` \ \___ / | /- _ `-/ ' (/\/ \ \ /\ / / | ` \ O O ) / | `-^--'` ' (_.) _ ) / `.___/` / `-----' / ----. __ / __ \ ----|====O)))==) \) /==== ----' `--' `.__,' \ | | \ / ______( (_ / \______ ,' ,-----' | \ `--{__________) \/ I'm a horny devil when riled. pete who? -=[ Grim Reaper ]=- 6/97 .""--.._ [] `'--.._ ||__ `'-, `)||_ ```'--.. \ _ /|//} ``--._ | .'` `'. /////} `\/ / .""".\ //{/// / /_ _`\\ // `|| | |(_)(_)|| _// || | | /\ )| _///\ || | |L====J | / |/ | || / /'-..-' / .'` \ | || / | :: | |_.-` | \ || /| `\-::.| | \ | || /` `| / | | | / || |` \ | / / \ | || | `\_| |/ ,.__. \ | || / /` `\ || || | . / \|| || | | |/ || / / | ( || / . / ) || | \ | || / | / || |\ / | || \ `-._ | / || \ ,//`\ /` | || ///\ \ | \ || |||| ) |__/ | || |||| `.( | || `\\` /` / || /` / || jgs / | || | \ || / | || /` \ || /` | || `-.___,-. .-. ___,' || `---'` `'----'` I need a drink, feel all giddy...hic! |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter