permaculture

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <venaurafarm@bellsouth.net>]

On 2/14/2012 7:56 PM, Lawrence F. London, Jr. wrote:

> And what is the catholic church doing while all this is going on?
> Ensuring their grip on a country's economic and political system,
> extending their tentacles further into the population seeking new
> followers, helping to undermine their traditional means of survival,
> food production systems, natural health, family planning hoping to
> increase their dependency on the state and the church.
>
> Vatican now supports GMOs
> http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v29/n1/full/nbt0111-11.html
>
> Vatican panel backs GMOs
>
> Anna Meldolesi
> Nature Biotechnology 29, 11 (2011) doi:10.1038/nbt0111-11
> http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v29/n1/full/nbt0111-11.html
> Published online 10 January 2011
>
> Reversing an earlier stand, the Vatican has gone public with detailed
> arguments in favor of the expansion of genetically engineered crops,
> especially in the developing world. This report is from Nature
> Biotechnology:
>
> A panel of scientists convened by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences
> (PAS) has made a passionate endorsement of genetically modified
> organisms (GMOs) for global food security and development. The
> statement, published in 16 languages in the 30 November issue of the
> journal New Biotechnology
> (http://www.ask-force.org/web/Vatican-PAS-Statement-FPT-PDF/PAS-Statement-English-FPT.pdf)
> is the result of a workshop held in the Vatican in May 2009, involving 7
> members of the PAS and 33 outside experts. It states that “there is a
> moral imperative” to make the benefits of genetic engineering technology
> “available on a larger scale to poor and vulnerable populations who want
> them,” urging opponents to consider the harm that withholding this
> technology will inflict on those who need it most.
>
> The panel's key recommendation is to free transgenic varieties “from
> excessive, unscientific regulation” that hampers agricultural progress
> by inflating the costs needed for crop R&D. Ingo Potrykus, a member of
> the panel and co-inventor of Golden Rice, who is at the Swiss Federal
> Institute of Technology in Zurich, is still waiting for its
> beta-carotene–enriched seeds to reach the fields and sees that
> decade-long delay as a bitter lesson for agricultural biotech. “There is
> lots of high-quality publicly funded research and lots of goodwill for
> public-private partnerships to use the technology for humanitarian ends,
> but nobody can invest a comparable amount of funds [to that spent by
> large agricultural firms]. It will be mandatory to change regulation if
> we have any interest in using the technology for public good and in the
> public sector and with nonindustrial crops.”

And a few comments:

Stewart Brand  -  I think the news here is that a highly prominent 
moralistic organization has reversed its public position on GMOs. 
(Finally joining, by the way, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics in the 
UK, which has made the ethical argument for GMOs for over ten years.) 
It’s like when The Nature Conservancy expressed public approval recently 
of some aspects of GMOs---the first environmental organization to do so. 
It’s a sign of change on an important matter so deep that institutions 
are willing to acknowledge the shift---something they seldom do.

Lawrence London  -  "- It was a sweet, knowledgeable audience at the 
University of Nebraska. One thing I learned is how deeply no-till 
agriculture has taken hold with GM soybean growers---their soil just 
gets richer and richer." Soil just gets richer and richer...with 
herbicide residues, unidentified plant residues, gmo seed to migrate 
offsite. Brand, you do not know what you are talking about. What a 
turncoat from the days of the WEC! Your type gets a little money in your 
pocket then you capitulate and play the same lying games the crooked, 
corrupt corporations do. When you could have helped move the natural 
agriculture forward on a global scale, instead you turned against it, 
assuming your role as traitor rather than leader. What's good for the 
goose is good for the gander, I suppose. As the WHO said: "we won't be 
fooled again".

<>

Notill GMO soy production depends completely on the use of herbicide, 
which could be roundup/glyphosate-based or 24D-type herbicides or worse. 
catholic church and stewart brand think this is all very ok, no problems.
They are all merely minions of the ag biotech industries, little 
insignificant grovelling sychophants squabbling and fighting for crumbs 
off the corporate table of hand outs of money and influence in high 
places. They would have served Stalin/Lenin/Trotsky/Beria, Hitler, Pol 
Pot and Mao well.