BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 7 Jul 2017 22:54:32 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (88 lines)
Trying this on my phone, so any typos mean I need a new contact lens.
(Optometrist said I have "Presbyopia", but I told him that's impossible, as
the family has been Lutheran since Martin Luther.)

>>> Some would and do say Ruskin is a shill for these guys.

>> No, no one has ever said that.

> Of course, someone has. Easily verified.

If it is so "easily verified", why is no such verification offered?
So, specifically who HAS said that?  
Who, what, when, and where, please.



>In fact, I have been accused myself of being a shill for Big Ag.

It is fairly easy to avoid such accusations, one must simply give fair
consideration to both sides of a debate point, and remain open to both new
information AND views that oppose one's own.  ("On the other hand, I have...
more freckles...")

Speaking for myself and those who I have asked, most of us wait in vain for
a chance to "sell out" to wealthy shadowy interests, but no one ever seems
to call, so everyone crestfallenly continues to apply for miniscule grants
and stipends to support their research. 

> I realize that agriculture will need to 
> evolve and incorporate new technologies, 
> such as new and more environmentally-
> friendly pesticides, precision breeding of
> crop cultivars (AKA genetic engineering)...

Significant gains have been made with better irrigation and fertilizers and
aggregation of small holdings into larger, more tractor-friendly farms, but
have new pesticides or genetic engineering really increased yields over the
older pesticides and non GMO-hybrids?  This is a very involved debate in
which I am not prepared to participate, but the mere fact that there is a
heated debate tells me that the impacts are neither clearly positive nor
significantly positive.    So, mechanization, yes; better irrigation
control, yes; satellite data controlling the manure spreader feed rate at a
resolution of 3 meters, heck yes; but new pesticides and genetic engineering
seem to have not delivered on the promise: 
http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/roundup-ready-crops/
http://tinyurl.com/y9zx77ly



>> The good news is that people tend 
>> to want to buy stuff, even at much 
>> higher prices, that can be proven 
>> to be ethically-produced,

> Another  dandy mistruth.  Not even close to reality.  
> anyone who checks facts will see that.

Another claim not backed up with anything in the way of evidence.
So let's check some facts, as suggested...

Nielsen does good surveys...
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/health-minded-global-consume
rs-put-their-money-where-their-mouths-are.html
http://tinyurl.com/y6wh629n

How about the "Beef: It's What For Dinner" Folks?
http://www.producer.com/2017/03/consumers-willing-to-pay-premium-for-organic
-natural-beef/
http://tinyurl.com/y7d9eboh

How about in Britain?
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/19/sales-of-organic-food-so
ar-fruit-vegetables-supermarkets
http://tinyurl.com/hahxwud

And why do you THINK Amazon bought Whole Foods?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-personalized-amazon-prime-membership-pa
ckages-on-the-way-2017-06-19
http://tinyurl.com/ycb6o7q9

I could go on, but anyone can find this, it is in the newspaper every week,
and at the grocery every day.

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2