This is a powerful message that is not being heard in our society, it may come up in conversations but is much like a whisper (you hear it but it doesn't have the power to be heard by everyone) that's why it is up to everyone here especially people who watch this video to take as much action as possible. (grow as much food as you can, try to buy organic, get active in environmental initiatives, support local farmers, and most importantly vote with your $) He is much like our grandfathers or the last generation instilling values in us that will affect all of our lives. He speaks with a heartfelt lifetime of sincere knowledge of plants/environmental issues so let's not turn this video into the classic GMO debate of whether they are good or bad, i say we support each other and and get excited about this younger generation who are starting small scale agriculture that are feeding healthy food to families and are tending to the environment like it is an extension of themselves!
+wiseandfunfox *~ I'm going to share this video. If everyone who watched would do the same then the number of people who watched it would grow incrementally *~
If I can summarize Kapuler's comments about the GMO agriculture, he is saying that he wants specific data about sequences of DNA in the revised genomes. That's not the same as saying "test them for generations" or "this is an offense against nature". It's something that can be demanded, and that can be done. As gene sequencing becomes cheaper and cheaper, it's something that can be done in reasonable time for reasonable cost. What he also needed to ask, but didn't, is "How well can we predict the effect of the gene arrangements which we WILL FIND?" At present, we can best find the effects by testing, nutritional comparisons, field trials, feeding studies, etc. A lot of those tests are done, but more are always welcome. The other thing he didn't say is that all sorts of other breeding techniques also mage genome changes, with the same exact kinds of uncertainties. Why don't we ask for the same kinds of data and the same kinds of studies for all these other new breeds?
***** GMO's are genetically modified organisms, it's not necessarily adding items to them or chemicals, it's altering their genetic makeup. Often times with the intent to decrease the doses of toxic poisons and pesticides. It's trying to make the plants naturally resistant to disease, pests and makes the harvest more abundant. The world wouldn't be where it is today without GMO's. And since the beginning of agriculture, humans have been manipulating the makeup of plants, it's just recently that we're able to do it bigger with our advances in technology. So GMO's aren't inherently bad. It's the corporations that are bad and in it for money. It's the fact that they're not disclosing information. It's the fact that there isn't more stringent testing processes on new developments. And the fact that it's reducing our access to heritage foods.
Great video! So much excellent info. The weather is being engineered as well. Rain forests are key, but they are also blocking the jet stream with "microwave type heaters" off the coast from Alaska to Oregon. Check out Pacificredwood1's youtube channel.
Having extensive data about longterm effects of anything GMO is certainly a good idea, but it would be nearly impossible to accomplish. The biggest challenge probably is that we have no control. We don't have information about the long-term effects of eating purely organic corn with no pesticides or herbicides, for example. You can't show whether GMO corn is safer than 'natural' corn (produced through hundreds of years of selective breeding based on nothing more complex or scientific than how it looked and tasted, neither of which are useful criteria for determining whether something is dangerous to eat or not) if you don't have any data on the natural corn. It's not very useful to just have one set of data since everything is relative. He is certainly correct about patents. Monsanto is a thoroughly evil organization, no matter what definition of evil you subscribe to. The way we have permitted agricultural economics to develop is very dangerous to everyone and benefits almost no one.
I don't think you listened to him. He never said he's particularly against GMOs. He said he's against the hidden, untested, brush-stroke science of GMOs. And rather he specifically said he supports genetic engineering if it's done right. We're just moving too fast without ensuring the safety of long term effects.
This is a powerful message that is not being heard in our society, it may come up in conversations but is much like a whisper (you hear it but it doesn't have the power to be heard by everyone) that's why it is up to everyone here especially people who watch this video to take as much action as possible. (grow as much food as you can, try to buy organic, get active in environmental initiatives, support local farmers, and most importantly vote with your $)
He is much like our grandfathers or the last generation instilling values in us that will affect all of our lives. He speaks with a heartfelt lifetime of sincere knowledge of plants/environmental issues so let's not turn this video into the classic GMO debate of whether they are good or bad, i say we support each other and and get excited about this younger generation who are starting small scale agriculture that are feeding healthy food to families and are tending to the environment like it is an extension of themselves!
+wiseandfunfox *~ I'm going to share this video. If everyone who watched would do the same then the number of people who watched it would grow incrementally *~
Wonderful video full of information that should be out there.
Julia
You bring tears to my eyes, sir.
If I can summarize Kapuler's comments about the GMO agriculture, he is saying that he wants specific data about sequences of DNA in the revised genomes. That's not the same as saying "test them for generations" or "this is an offense against nature". It's something that can be demanded, and that can be done. As gene sequencing becomes cheaper and cheaper, it's something that can be done in reasonable time for reasonable cost.
What he also needed to ask, but didn't, is "How well can we predict the effect of the gene arrangements which we WILL FIND?" At present, we can best find the effects by testing, nutritional comparisons, field trials, feeding studies, etc. A lot of those tests are done, but more are always welcome.
The other thing he didn't say is that all sorts of other breeding techniques also mage genome changes, with the same exact kinds of uncertainties. Why don't we ask for the same kinds of data and the same kinds of studies for all these other new breeds?
Truth telling at its finest
Beautifully explained ;)
Very interesting, thank you
Government-approved GMO profit-making crops: Fascism at its Finest!
GMO's aren't bad. It's who has the rights to them and refuses to divulge info that is.
+nesekaba *~ If that's true why don't we have full disclosure? *~
You are wrong!
Willem Pretorius *~ Eat my share and when you die I don't want to hear you complaining *~
***** GMO's are genetically modified organisms, it's not necessarily adding items to them or chemicals, it's altering their genetic makeup. Often times with the intent to decrease the doses of toxic poisons and pesticides. It's trying to make the plants naturally resistant to disease, pests and makes the harvest more abundant. The world wouldn't be where it is today without GMO's. And since the beginning of agriculture, humans have been manipulating the makeup of plants, it's just recently that we're able to do it bigger with our advances in technology.
So GMO's aren't inherently bad. It's the corporations that are bad and in it for money. It's the fact that they're not disclosing information. It's the fact that there isn't more stringent testing processes on new developments. And the fact that it's reducing our access to heritage foods.
@@nesekaba --Great comment except that crop biotechnology is not reducing our access to heritage foods and that the companies in it are bad.
My surname is Kapulare, looks similar to yours.
Great video! So much excellent info. The weather is being engineered as well. Rain forests are key, but they are also blocking the jet stream with "microwave type heaters" off the coast from Alaska to Oregon. Check out Pacificredwood1's youtube channel.
Having extensive data about longterm effects of anything GMO is certainly a good idea, but it would be nearly impossible to accomplish. The biggest challenge probably is that we have no control. We don't have information about the long-term effects of eating purely organic corn with no pesticides or herbicides, for example. You can't show whether GMO corn is safer than 'natural' corn (produced through hundreds of years of selective breeding based on nothing more complex or scientific than how it looked and tasted, neither of which are useful criteria for determining whether something is dangerous to eat or not) if you don't have any data on the natural corn. It's not very useful to just have one set of data since everything is relative.
He is certainly correct about patents. Monsanto is a thoroughly evil organization, no matter what definition of evil you subscribe to. The way we have permitted agricultural economics to develop is very dangerous to everyone and benefits almost no one.
+Dustin Rodriguez *~ If more of us would demand the information, we would get it *~
great!! greed never stops, vote for Bernie sanders, Love, Kathy
That was 10 min of solid gibberish.From a man who is alive thanks to conventional medicine and genetic modification!
you haven't a clue.
I don't think you listened to him. He never said he's particularly against GMOs. He said he's against the hidden, untested, brush-stroke science of GMOs. And rather he specifically said he supports genetic engineering if it's done right. We're just moving too fast without ensuring the safety of long term effects.
Jack Clark thank you for being someone who fully understood what this man said. Thank you for stating this rebuttal so clearly!
I understand gibberish, and this is good a explanation.let hear yours truenorth747 since it sound like you know better?
Right on True!!