(I know this is about Rifftrax, but we don’t have a Rifftrax community.)
This is what these non GMO types always seem to forget: we’ve been modifying the crap out of everything for the past thousands of years. We’re now justuch more efficient and smart about it.
Manufacturing gmo’s is not the same thing as selective breeding
You’re right. It’s far more precise, quick, and predictable.
This is what these non GMO types always seem to forget
This is what these nauseating pro-GMO types always seem to forget - developing a food crop for thousands of years to become useful to humanity is not the same thing as destroying food security through capitalist monocropping with the aid of a few dodgy genes injected into something that never needed it in the first place.
destroying food security through capitalist monocropping
This has very little to do with GMOs.
You want to claim that capitalists are (somehow) not the only people that stands to benefit from GMOs?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
That’s such a stupid statement I don’t even know how to respond. Like I’d probably need to recreate several years of basic education before we could even be in the framework to consider a proper answer to your question. But which point you’d realize what a stupid premise it is.
Let’s start here: why the hate for GMOs, when your problem is with capitalism?
That’s such a stupid statement
Good lord - I so hate dealing with liberals.
The only reason we have GMO food crops in the first place is due to capitalist profiteering - nobody else has any need for it, genius. GMO food crops is a “solution” to a “problem” that never existed.
Is this hard to understand, liberal?
They always picture someone in a lab with syringes and special machines to “modify DNA”. Most of the time it’s just a couple of potted plants under a lamp and a cotton swab. For fruit trees, you’re pretty much just replacing a branch with another branch. Tape and staples might be involved.
Genetically modified plants is very different from selective breeding. Selective breeding mimics the natural evolution process, removing natural selection and replacing it with human decisions.
Using a separate root stock from your fruiting trees isn’t genetic modification or breeding. It’s just taking desirable size features from a root stock and growing your desired fruit from that. It still remains two different plant, with two different DNAs. The fruit would produce a child of the fruit tree, the same as if it was grown from seed. If the root tree was allowed to flower it would create a seed the same as if it were never grafted.
GMO are an extremely useful technology. When well regulated and tested will help produce food for the growing world population. The big problems with it are the consequences of it. Plant have been modified to tolerate high doses of weed killer, pesticides and fertilisers. These all help increase the productivity of the land, but the impacts are terrible on the local environment. Residual weed killer and pesticide may pose a risk to human as well.
Thanks. Comments above yours are a bit disingenuous, trying to bunch up intrusive lab techniques with selective breeding. While the definition of GMO is pretty vague, let’s not pretend what Monsanto does is exactly the same as what Native Americans did.
It’s not. It’s more advanced, and yes, it’s better.
You know, more technology becomes available, you use it to make life better for everyone. Monsanto execta can go pound dicks, but in principle, GMO food is perfectly fine, safe, and healthy. If anything, it’ll be more healthy (more vitamins), more plentiful as new crops can withstand droughts better, etc. etc. etc.
So far the only counter argument to that that I’ve heard here is “nuh uh!”
Do you think the Native Americans hundreds of years ago were wearing lab coats in clean rooms, CRISPRing fucking maize? Selective breeding is different than genetic modification. If you don’t even know what it is or what you’re talking about about AT ALL, to the point where you’re conflating two completely dissimilar terms, maybe you should keep your opinions to yourself.
Sorry, but it doesn’t seem like you know what you’re talking about. It’s essentially the same process, the GMO process is just faster. Also, it was done well before CRISPR was a big thing.
GMO is not monocropping either.
Monocropping sucks for other reasons
Selective breeding is different than genetic modification.
Nope. Both are genetic modifications.
CRISPRing fucking maize?
Also not true. CRISPR is bacteria mechanism and is not used in plants.
Have we checked all food to see if exploding them makes them into something better or did we just stop with corn?
Potatoes Apples Marijuana Bananas Tulips Etc…
Bananas are a similar one to corn too. Take something almost entirely inedible and cultivate it into something edible. Makes you wonder what convinced them to start.
Let me tell you a little story about brassicas… broccoli, cabbage, bok choi, cauliflower, kohlrabi, canola oil. They’re all this little guy. Edit: Shit! I missed the exploding part.
And yet I love broccoli but hate cauliflower.
Can you elaborate? Texture differences?
One tastes good, the other does not.
Ya cauliflower is nast, it stinks like sweaty ugly. Brocolli is delish and the texture is perfect for sauces.
I hate raw cauliflower but boiled with rice is pretty good. By far, it’s my favorite vegetable to deep fry or air fry.
Roast that shit. Hot sheet tray, olive oil, salt, 400° till it’s brown and crispy on the bottom. So good.
