THE GMO SCRAPBOOK: THE NEW MEME IS “RE-WILDING” CROPS
Here's one for your growing GMO scrapbook, and this one, at least to my mind, is breathtaking. We'll get to why I consider it so in a moment. But first, consider this article:
Back to the future: Scientists want 'rewilded' crops to boost agriculture
The operative paragraphs in my high octane speculation of the day are these:
"Scientists should "re-wild" food crops by inserting lost genetic properties of ancient, edible plants in order to boost agricultural output for a growing population, a new study said.
"Important properties of wild plants, including varieties of wheat and rice, have been unintentionally lost during thousands of years of breeding.
When humans first domesticated wheat around 7500 BC, farmers chose to use seeds based on a few selected traits, particularly their yields.
"But such decisions, made by generations of farmers, could have weakened the resilience of crops in the face new challenges such as global warming, according to the study published on Tuesday in the journal Trends in Plant Science.
"We estimate that all crops would benefit from re-wilding," Michael Broberg Palmgren, a scientist at the University of Copenhagen and one of the study's authors, wrote in an email.
Re-wilded crops could become more drought tolerant, more resistant to cold, diseases and pests and more efficient in accessing soil nutrients, Palmgren wrote.
"The scientists suggest using biotechnology to re-insert desired genes from wild varieties of popular crops into widely consumed strains in order to improve food security." (emphases added)
Now, if you've been following my blogs on the whole GMO story, you'll recall that one of my main arguments against GMOs has not only been the inadequate, and indeed, totally lacking long-term intergenerational studies of their effects environmentally, but that the whole GMO scheme has really been just a profiteering plot to supplant the centuries of selective breeding of traits with the shotgun blast of genetic engineering and "patentable plants."
Thus, what is being proposed here is that that very agronomical practice was harmful in that it bred out certain natural characteristics by natural practices of selective breeding over long spans of time, and that, with genetic engineering, the traits thus outbred can be reinjected. And all this in the name of "greater crop adaptability" in "the face of new challenges such as global warming." So in other words, natural crops - that means the non-patented kind folks - simply won't be able to adapt fast enough to "crises" and "challenges like global warming," so they should be abandoned for even more genetic tinkering to restore traits bred out of crops thousands of years ago.
If you doubt that this is about profit, then consider posing this challenge to the "scientists" making this hairbrained suggestion: Why not breed those traits back into crops by natural agronomical selective breeding, over a few generations of plants? Start now, and within say, 20-30 years, and one might have made a significant enough start. Why use genetic engineering at all? Why not use the same method to breed the desired traits back into the crops as was allegedly used thousands of years ago to breed them out? At that juncture, I suspect, the mask will come off and we'll be told that "there isn't enough time," and all the usual questionable models will be produced to "prove" there isn't, financed by all the usual questionable suspects.
Or to put it country simple: "global warming" + "genetic engineering" + "rewilding" = the latest GMO promotion meme.
See you on the flip side...
11 Comments
Help the Community Grow
Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.
My Fellow Terrans
Mutated DNA ( e.g., GMO ) can be reverted to its former condition by treatment with electrostatic fields and select frequencies.
The pioneering work was done by Ebner( ” Primeval Code ” ) while working @ CIBA Geigy, which corp. promptly suppressed the discovery.
The tech could be applied to the entire planet via an array satellites.
But Nature probably will do it in its own way, by a temporary huge increase in solar output, roasting the planet to a depth of several feet ( as forewarned by several ancient prophecies, and Edwy Dames ), and hyper-energizing it with cosmic splooge and stuff.
Which is why the Pleiadians are here : to help evacuate the planet. Otherwise, there will be too few survivors ( humans or other animals ), and the human experiment will end.
Sayonara, Suckas !
Grammar correction: of which our cities are full.
To quote Sir Winston Churchill to the English teacher during World War II, who reminded the Prime Minister not to end sentences with prepositions, “Madam, that is a matter up with which I shall not put.”
Mama,
The “rule” comes from Latin where the order of preposition then noun matters (one of the few places that word order matters in classical Latin). People trying to settle the rules of English grammar were trying to force English into this “rule”.
In short, it’s entirely made up, and you can freely end sentences with a preposition and also split infinitives.
For style reasons, you can follow those “rules”, but insisting on them is a sign of no particular familiarity with English grammar.
So in fact the correction is incorrect.
Lost and Joseph,
Great come backs. I’ll have to remember those clever responses. (smile).
db
The action of the GMO, Monsanto ‘scientists’ falls right into line with what Hillary Clinton recommended: “Genetically Modified sounds too Frankesteinish. We need to change the language to make it sound more acceptable.”
CLINTON’S RECOMMENDATION RECORDED:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeJ-RC-q0Z4
No doubt the “doomsday Seed Vault” will sometime become a patented gold mine, another deja-vu back-to-the-future, imposed privatization law, that facilitates legalized plunder/pillage at the expense of the common people of Earth, for devil in the “rule of law” details. “The rule of law” that is false historically, and in the present, because it does not fully acknowledge its dark side.
“The Rule of Law” that camouflages the taking of land, water, minerals, and labor. Laws as fictional jurisprudence being fundamentally illegal.
Do it the old fashion way just look for plants we can domesticate. There’re still plenty of them out there if we can prevent the on going plant extinction along side animal extinction. But all this is cover for the oligarchs to own and enslave the whole biosphere wallowing in their bottomless greed. Power and wealth unlimited are their ultimate gods.
I would counter with this argument: global warming will make more of the Earth arable and will give us access to virgin soil undepleted of mineral content. I look forward to getting my forty acres and a mule when the ice sheet melts on the Antarctic. And who knows what I will find when tilling the soil down there? A crystal hard drive with Lucifer locked inside? Giant bones I can sell to the Mormons? Or some of the remains of the nazi bell? (Maybe nature has factored in the stupidity of humans and gives us global warming and even pole shifts to free up farm land after humans have sorely abused the lands they currently use?) In the meantime, when this global warming does strike, I for one will look forward to growing my own bananas and oranges in my backyard. And thanks to the benefits of genetic engineering, I hopefully will live long enough to harvest this fruit. Currently I survive off the plethora of overlooked wild plants that nature has bestowed on us and agri scientists and businessmen ignore: those experienced plants that have taught themselves to gather nutrients from deep in the bowels of the soil or even to pilfer them from the genetically modified greenhorn plants. I consume so much nettle tea and soup in the spring, my skin turns a tinge green. And thank god for the stupendous tap root of the comfrey plant. One leaf will provide all the minerals a human needs. How the original terraformers of our planet would laugh if they knew about the crude efforts of our modern, medieval scientists to modify their original, flawless work.
What can we expect next? “Wilding” homo sapiens? I think that was already done with the addition of pig, monkey, and insect genes long ago (and whatever else they stuffed into us). As I watched the Ferguson riots, I’ll be the first to admit, I had an innate longing to join the ruckus and warm my hands beside a burning building or police car. Were my “wild” genes calling me? Probably so.
My question for Dr. Farrell for a future vidchat: what correlation does the inception of fermenting wild grains to produce alcoholic beverages have with the onset of inter species mating among biped creatures? Do you think the introduction of social lubricants facilitated cross breeding between the various species of hominids? I myself have witnessed many unimaginable connections occur after the bartender makes his last call and suspect their is nothing new under the Sun.
You say: I would counter with this argument: global warming will make more of the Earth arable and will give us access to virgin soil undepleted of mineral content.
My question is: What will happen to those oceans once they had swallowed the poisonous substances of which our coastal cities are full of? Won´t that be a problem?
Looks to be an excuse to patent newly “wild” plants, and perhaps of course animals.