Agriculture

[sunseeker]

Anyway, it is kind of ironic to see the threads arguing biotech crops, next to other threads defending the nuclear industry. 
 
 
 

Yea that IS funny, but human nature I guess. 

I have no problem with most of the advances in Agri........   What I have a problem with is the product not producing seed that can be re-planted.  i don't want to see a situation where we have to buy form a Monsanto because they control all the seed.  Don't like anyone having control over all the food.   That's my big rub. 


Just cooked a big slab of salmon and had it with my special dill sauce.  Man, was that good.  That was my last piece so now the hunt for more is on.  Got to get back in touch with my "Alaska connection"  and have him send me some more.

SW
I whole heartedly second that. No organisation should ever be allowed to get a stranglehold on something basic/essential to life and well being. If the technology had a military application then the government would step in and appropriate/licence the technology as a matter of national interest. Food is security too. This technology is dangerous. Apart from the unknown future consequences to health, what if someone identified a gene in a particular section of society or race and genetically modified crops to attack people carrying that gene or combination of genes? In time you could probably take it to the stage where you could even target individuals.

At one time scientists didn't/couldn't  patent discoveries such as drugs or weapons if it was in the national interest.
Some inventions where the inventor didn't receive a direct financial gain....
Alexander Fleming >Penicillin.
Tim Berners-Lee > The internet.
Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov >AK-45.


Salmon..

Apart from the taste.
On looks...
The thicker the white lines (fat) in the flesh of the fish then the more likely that it's farmed (what ever the labelling).
Recently a major supermarket was shown up on TV over it's labelling of tuna. Each can has an identification code which can be traced to the processing plant. It wasn't dolphin friendly after all.

ATB 

[onlooker]

SS'S quote:

1990 British Beef is safe to eat.

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

~    ~   ~

See: 

Japan nuclear crisis: Fears mount over radioactive waste in food

Fears are mounting among Japanese health authorities that food and milk from areas surrounding the Fukushima nuclear plant could be contaminated with radioactive waste.

By Nick Allen, Tokyo 4:30PM GMT 21 Mar 2011

Yukio Edano, Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary, said shipments of spinach from four provinces surrounding the plant had been halted. Milk shipments from Fukushima province have also been banned.

Mr Edano, the increasingly haggard face of the Japanese government's response to the crisis, sought to quell fears by saying radiation levels in food were not harmful to human health, and that he was prepared to eat contaminated produce himself.

He said: "Even if you eat and drink them several times it will not be a health hazard. So I would like you to act calmly without reacting." Asked if he would be happy to give spinach and milk to his family, he said: "Of course."

His comments were reminiscent of when John Gummer, the then Agriculture Minister, was pictured with his four-year-old daughter and half-eaten hamburgers, in an attempt to calm the British public during the "mad cow disease" outbreak in 1990.

The World Health Organisation appeared to disagree with Mr Edano, announcing that radiation seeping into food and water was "a lot more serious" than previously thought.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/japan-earthquake-and-tsunami-in/8395985/Japan-nuclear-crisis-Fears-mount-over-radioactive-waste-in-food.html

See:

Japanese food imports banned over radiation concerns
March 19, 2011

Government’s around the world move to protect their citizens from radioactive food imports:
   The Italian government announced this morning that it will be banning all food imports from Japan.
   The Indian government has ordered any Japenese food imports to be tested for radiation.
   The European Union is telling all member states to check for radiation in food imports from Japan
   Malaysian Health minister says they are “monitor the situation closely” and have started screening all food imports. MASkargo & Malaysia Airlines have also stopped flying cargo into Japan.
   China’s General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine ordered all goods from Japan to be screened for radiation.
   Singapore increases inspections of all imports.
   Australia and New Zealand are stepping up efforts to inspect food imports from Japan

http://offgridsurvival.com/japanesefoodimports/

~     ~     ~

Japanese produce from farmland areas near the Fukushima nuclear plant is safe to eat?   

Planning to get some Kobe beef, anyone?   

Writer Nick Allen reminds his readers that Yukio Edano, Japan's Chief Cabinet Secretary saying that produce from farming areas near the Fukushima nuclear plant are safe to eat is reminiscent of when John Gummer, the then British Agriculture Minister demonstrating to the British public during the 1990 “mad cow disease” that British cow meat was safe to eat.

Meanwhile, on March 21, 2011, Viterra Inc. (TSE:VT,  http://www.google.ca/finance?q=TSE:VT  I own none of this stock ) which is a company with agricultural businesses in Australia (about 4,800 miles from Japan) rocketed from $11.11 to $11.57 on news of contaminated Japanese produce.

I think that certain agriculture (and oil) stocks will do well this summer.

[sunseeker]

Hi OL

When they said that we where in a “New Uranium Bull Market.”
I didn't expect it to be taken literally. 

ATB 

[onlooker]

Hi SS,

SS’s quote:

When they said that we where in a “New Uranium Bull Market.”
I didn't expect it to be taken literally.

There's always a joker in every crowd.  LOL.  Very clever play on words!

~    ~    ~

Ol’s quote:

I think that certain agriculture (and oil) stocks will do well this summer till the end of May.

I will heed to Martin Armstrong’s cautionary comments that June, 2011 is a turning point for the markets.

So I plan to “get the hell out of dodge (the markets)” before the end of May; not mid-September, the end of summer.   

[yeocokent]

Anyway, it is kind of ironic to see the threads arguing biotech crops, next to other threads defending the nuclear industry.  
 
  
 

Yea that IS funny, but human nature I guess.  

I have no problem with most of the advances in Agri........   What I have a problem with is the product not producing seed that can be re-planted.  i don't want to see a situation where we have to buy form a Monsanto because they control all the seed.  Don't like anyone having control over all the food.   That's my big rub.  


Just cooked a big slab of salmon and had it with my special dill sauce.  Man, was that good.  That was my last piece so now the hunt for more is on.  Got to get back in touch with my "Alaska connection"  and have him send me some more.

SW
I whole heartedly second that. No organisation should ever be allowed to get a stranglehold on something basic/essential to life and well being. If the technology had a military application then the government would step in and appropriate/licence the technology as a matter of national interest. Food is security too. This technology is dangerous. Apart from the unknown future consequences to health, what if someone identified a gene in a particular section of society or race and genetically modified crops to attack people carrying that gene or combination of genes? In time you could probably take it to the stage where you could even target individuals.

At one time scientists didn't/couldn't  patent discoveries such as drugs or weapons if it was in the national interest.
Some inventions where the inventor didn't receive a direct financial gain....
Alexander Fleming >Penicillin.
Tim Berners-Lee > The internet.
Mikhail Timofeyevich Kalashnikov >AK-45.


Salmon..

Apart from the taste.
On looks...
The thicker the white lines (fat) in the flesh of the fish then the more likely that it's farmed (what ever the labelling).
Recently a major supermarket was shown up on TV over it's labelling of tuna. Each can has an identification code which can be traced to the processing plant. It wasn't dolphin friendly after all.

ATB  

I would agree with you and SW that no company should control all of our food supply.  However I would not agree that Monsanto does or can do that.  I could go into detail as to why but do not want to hijack the thread.  I am not a big fan of Monsanto either, however there is a lot of plain untrue information on them out there.  Kind of like George Bush. I wasn’t a fan of his at all but found myself defending him on occasion because of all the accusations based on emotion.
I still stand by MON as a good investment though.

[MetalMeister]

Help me!

I missed something in not being here to read everyday like usual.

What is this about June 2011?

Was this something Armstrong said?  Or somebody else?

Thanks!

 

Hi SS,

SS’s quote:

When they said that we where in a “New Uranium Bull Market.”
I didn't expect it to be taken literally.

There's always a joker in every crowd.  LOL.  Very clever play on words!

~    ~    ~

Ol’s quote:

I think that certain agriculture (and oil) stocks will do well this summer till the end of May.

I will heed to Martin Armstrong’s cautionary comments that June, 2011 is a turning point for the markets.

So I plan to “get the hell out of dodge (the markets)” before the end of May; not mid-September, the end of summer.   

[sunseeker]

My dark horse stock (I mentioned ) CRM which has been quietly doing well and giving me dividends too (currently 3.57% and it's 2.67 times covered).
http://www.carrs-milling.com/

CRM has an engineering division which makes robotic arms for the nuclear industry too.
http://www.hwm.com/

The Dark Horse galloping on good results....
                                               
                                                                                         


                                             

http://www.moneyam.com/action/news/showArticle?id=4123083

I got in at 453 

ATB 

[MetalMeister]

http://www.darkhorse.com/



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Apocalypse#Black_Horse



http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=rev%206&version=NKJV

Revelation 6 (New King James Version)

First Seal: The Conqueror

 1 Now I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals;[a] and I heard one of the four living creatures saying with a voice like thunder, “Come and see.” 2 And I looked, and behold, a white horse. He who sat on it had a bow; and a crown was given to him, and he went out conquering and to conquer.

Second Seal: Conflict on Earth
  
3 When He opened the second seal, I heard the second living creature saying, “Come and see.” 4 Another horse, fiery red, went out. And it was granted to the one who sat on it to take peace from the earth, and that people should kill one another; and there was given to him a great sword.

Third Seal: Scarcity on Earth
  
5 When He opened the third seal, I heard the third living creature say, “Come and see.” So I looked, and behold, a black horse, and he who sat on it had a pair of scales in his hand. 6 And I heard a voice in the midst of the four living creatures saying, “A quart[c] of wheat for a denarius,[d] and three quarts of barley for a denarius; and do not harm the oil and the wine.”

Fourth Seal: Widespread Death on Earth
  
7 When He opened the fourth seal, I heard the voice of the fourth living creature saying, “Come and see.” 8 So I looked, and behold, a pale horse. And the name of him who sat on it was Death, and Hades followed with him. And power was given to them over a fourth of the earth, to kill with sword, with hunger, with death, and by the beasts of the earth.
Fifth Seal: The Cry of the Martyrs
  
9 When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held. 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then a white robe was given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer, until both the number of their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed.

Sixth Seal: Cosmic Disturbances
  
12 I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold,[e] there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon[f] became like blood. 13 And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. 14 Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved out of its place. 15 And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders,[g] the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, 16 and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! 17 For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?”

[sunseeker]

Organic farming outperforms conventional in yields, economic viability, conservation, and health

http://www.naturalnews.com/033925_organic_farming_crop_yields.html

In the short term, organic yields appeared to be smaller than chemical-based yields. But over time, organic yields eventually caught up to, and even exceeded, chemical-based yields. Organic production also proved to be more profitable to farmers than chemical-based production because it requires significantly less energy input, representing a nearly 50 percent reduction over chemical-based farming.

At the same time, chemical-based farming was shown to emit as much as 40 percent more greenhouse gases than organic farming. Chemical-based farming was also shown to significantly destroy soil health, which makes maintaining viable soils far more expensive and laborious than it is in an organic system.

I noticed this many years ago.
When I first started growing some of my own food I used artificial fertilizer and insecticide. The first year I did have a bumper crop. Much of that initial success may have been down to the ground being left fallow for many years by the previous occupants. After three years I was not only disappointed with the crops I was adding up the costs of the chemicals. If only I hadn't been brainwashed by the media and advertising. I don't use any chemicals now, and I believe that all round benefits to the environment the taste and healthiness of the produce speak for themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94bdMSCdw20

Hey farmer farmer
Put away that DDT * now
Give me spots on my apples
But leave me the birds and the bees
Please!

Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone.

DDT |Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) Chemical. Created by a Nobel Prizewinner no less.
http://www.asmalldoseof.org/historyoftox/1940-1960s.htox.php


The economic disaster (another instance brought about by flying in the face of logic)  that we are heading towards may not be the only comparison that history will make with the 1930's
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvKJ9fK99YU&feature=related

A fight against nature is a fight that mankind will ultimately lose. Swimming against the tide.


ATB 

[yeocokent]

Organic farming outperforms conventional in yields, economic viability, conservation, and health

http://www.naturalnews.com/033925_organic_farming_crop_yields.html

In the short term, organic yields appeared to be smaller than chemical-based yields. But over time, organic yields eventually caught up to, and even exceeded, chemical-based yields. Organic production also proved to be more profitable to farmers than chemical-based production because it requires significantly less energy input, representing a nearly 50 percent reduction over chemical-based farming.

At the same time, chemical-based farming was shown to emit as much as 40 percent more greenhouse gases than organic farming. Chemical-based farming was also shown to significantly destroy soil health, which makes maintaining viable soils far more expensive and laborious than it is in an organic system.

I noticed this many years ago.
When I first started growing some of my own food I used artificial fertilizer and insecticide. The first year I did have a bumper crop. Much of that initial success may have been down to the ground being left fallow for many years by the previous occupants. After three years I was not only disappointed with the crops I was adding up the costs of the chemicals. If only I hadn't been brainwashed by the media and advertising. I don't use any chemicals now, and I believe that all round benefits to the environment the taste and healthiness of the produce speak for themselves.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94bdMSCdw20

Hey farmer farmer
Put away that DDT * now
Give me spots on my apples
But leave me the birds and the bees
Please!

Don't it always seem to go
That you don't know what you've got
Till it's gone.

DDT |Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) Chemical. Created by a Nobel Prizewinner no less.
http://www.asmalldoseof.org/historyoftox/1940-1960s.htox.php


The economic disaster (another instance brought about by flying in the face of logic)  that we are heading towards may not be the only comparison that history will make with the 1930's
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvKJ9fK99YU&feature=related

A fight against nature is a fight that mankind will ultimately lose. Swimming against the tide.


ATB 

"Organic farming outperforms conventional in yields, economic viability, conservation, and health".  If that is factually correct, I would expect to see a mad rush of farmers switching to organic production.

[sunseeker]

Hi Yeo....

I watch farming programs and more and more farmers are taking the organic route. First of all the farmer feels a responsibly for stewardship of the land. Profit is no longer the prime consideration, and helping to save the environment is. A year or two after that decision they find that their artificially fertilized impoverished soils improve. This leads to naturally increased yields. There are plenty of sources of organic fertilizer. Compost and manures are waste materials, they are relatively cheap and easy to obtain (and more enviromentally friendly than the alternative) but best of all they improve the soil structure. There are also many organic pesticides and pest controls. Let the soil recover and allow the natural predators to thrive.

It's only then that it dawns on the farmer that organic farming is both sustainable and economical.

Which is why I pointed out that the non organic approach only works in the short term. Soils gradually become impoverished and totally reliant on organic fertilizer. Many pesticides indiscriminately kill and natural predators die too (natural predators are free).

Non organic farming ultimately only benefits big (Agri) business. Big agri business has the publicity machine and political clout to distort the overall picture. Like many of the medically prescribed drugs that people take too. Not needed at all, not needed in the quantities  prescribed, and unless it's incurable shouldn't be a viewed as a long term option.

Technology has it's place......
Mechanisation makes large mono culture fields viable as long as we have cheap oil (I'm not against that per Se). Satellites in space can tell the farmer when the crop is ready to harvest, and can even tell the farmer which parts of his land need fertiliser (rather than uniformly fertilize the whole field).


I'm only against genetically modified food because I can't believe that there wont be long term adverse effects. Breeding in genetic traits (plant breeding) is safer. If it cant be bred in then (genes from a different species/even an animal) then it has a greater potential to become a danger. It's a Pandora's Box where we're relying on hope being left behind. I once suggested that the genetic seed companies should be required to further modify their products so that they would be instantly distinguishable from unmodified crops. This would also help to monitor the spread and highlight any cross contamination with non genetically modified crops both in the field and on the shelf. I do see the benefits, but I don't believe the hype, and I'd like to think that we could detect and eradicate them if and when drawbacks where discovered.
If it came down to eating genetically modified food and risking some side effects or starving to death? I'd eat it. But I don't think that that is even an issue in any country except maybe the most impoverished.

ATB