GM grass linked to Texas cattle deaths

Help Support CattleToday:

It seems that you want to argue for the sake of arguing.

However I do not agree that a hybrid is genetically modified. It is created by crossing / breeding two different breeds (can't think of a better word right now) resulting in a cross (hybrid). The GM plants are not cross pollinated to create the GM planters. It has DNA manually added to create a new plant. And it is not the same as artificial insemination.
 
inbredredneck":1azq3c1t said:
pdfangus":1azq3c1t said:
I am so far beyond trying to tell you anything that it is laughable....

go to heaven
Are you still upset about being taken to school by an inbredredneck about Nitrogen application? I apologize for teaching you.

for you to think that you could teach me anything at this point, would imply that I thought you knew something.....

Truly I say unto you....that is not the case.
 
chippie":3is5d5ar said:
It seems that you want to argue for the sake of arguing.

However I do not agree that a hybrid is genetically modified. It is created by crossing / breeding two different breeds (can't think of a better word right now) resulting in a cross (hybrid). The GM plants are not cross pollinated to create the GM planters. It has DNA manually added to create a new plant. And it is not the same as artificial insemination.
A hybrid is a genetically modified plant no other way around it. Call it what you want, but it is what it is, and that is genetically modified.
 
pdfangus":s47ke09f said:
inbredredneck":s47ke09f said:
pdfangus":s47ke09f said:
I am so far beyond trying to tell you anything that it is laughable....

go to heaven
Are you still upset about being taken to school by an inbredredneck about Nitrogen application? I apologize for teaching you.

for you to think that you could teach me anything at this point, would imply that I thought you knew something.....

Truly I say unto you....that is not the case.
Maybe I don't know anything, but that is still more than what you knew about nitrogen.
 
That is why 'genetic modification' is the stupidest phrase out there because for sure some kid is going to stare up at you wide-eyed and innocent "but *technically* I'm right and all dairy cows are genetically modified. They have to be, because the aurochs don't have that much milk."
Which is probably what the reporter is trying to convince himself right now, wilfully ignorant of the actual meaning of the words he used.

Since we're crossposting ibrd; I see you enjoy using that wilful ignorance just as much as me or my sibs indulged in that sort of wordplay in our pre-teens.
 
inbredredneck":mff854t6 said:
chippie":mff854t6 said:
It seems that you want to argue for the sake of arguing.

However I do not agree that a hybrid is genetically modified. It is created by crossing / breeding two different breeds (can't think of a better word right now) resulting in a cross (hybrid). The GM plants are not cross pollinated to create the GM planters. It has DNA manually added to create a new plant. And it is not the same as artificial insemination.
A hybrid is a genetically modified plant no other way around it. Call it what you want, but it is what it is, and that is genetically modified.

Just for the sake of clarity, I would like to make sure we all understand your position. To keep it simple, I'll stick to the plant world.
Is it your position that, (for example) the Mortgage Lifter tomato variety, which came about through the process of cross pollinating several other tomato varieties, over the course of several years of plant selection by a man who wanted to enhance certain natural traits, is a GM organism completely analogous to (for example) Round-up ready corn, which was modified at the cellular level, not through plant selection or enhancement of natural traits, but by the addition of non-native DNA in order to give it a completely unnatural resistance to a chemical that should kill it dead?
If that is indeed your position, I guess I would absolutely agreed with Regolith in interpreting that is incredibly sophmoric position that seems intended to inflame rather than one intended to foster honest debate and contemplation.
 
CottageFarm.....

Excellent question but fully half the words will be difficult to fide in the dictionary for the target of your question.
 
Any change in genetics is a change in the DNA. Genetics is controlled by the DNA. They are really one in the same.
You change the DNA by crossbreeding, cross pollinating, etc. which leads to a more or less uncontrolled result.
Or you can start at the other end and change the DNA to more control the results.
I think the problem people have is that it is not natural. If that is what they want to stick with then they should revert back to natural selection and let all the cattle run loose, or only eat tomatoes that developed by pollen blowing in the wind from who knows where.
 
"A hybrid is a genetically modified plant no other way around it. Call it what you want, but it is what it is, and that is genetically modified."

Under that premise the entire plant and animal kingdom is ALREADY genetically modified- so there should be no issue with GM to begin with.
Evolution is the process of genetic modification, so it is a natural process that has been going on for billions of years.
Humans have had their hand in genetic modification since the caveman(turning wolves into dogs by accident)- and it has served man well ever since.
So why now should it be considered unnatural even villainous ? Especially since it(excluding modification at a cellular level) is a natural and necessary process to begin with.
 
Correct howdy that's why I said it would be very difficult to find a non genetically modified organism. This GM stuff is bullshit. Stupid people with no common sense.
 
Howdyjabo":2ceqy5az said:
Evolution is the process of genetic modification, so it is a natural process that has been going on for billions of years.
So we are going to speed up evolution by shooting the he!! out of everything with the 'gene gun' :p
 
I am only pointing out that putting gene manipulation in the same category as selective line breeding for improvements is NOT RIGHT

That line(putting line breeding and GM in the same category) seems to be extremist-- and from what I have seen - all Extremists are wrong-- no matter which side of the spectrum they fall on- on ANY subject. Extremists passion blinds them from reality and sques all information processed.
 
i don't see why it's such a big deal.
how many different grasses produce prussic acid under certain condition ?
it's not like this is something new or unheard of
mostly just media hype
 
Howdyjabo":5339ftai said:
I am only pointing out that putting gene manipulation in the same category as selective line breeding for improvements is NOT RIGHT
Where is the line to be drawn?
That line(putting line breeding and GM in the same category) seems to be extremist-- and from what I have seen - all Extremists are wrong-- no matter which side of the spectrum they fall on- on ANY subject. Extremists passion blinds them from reality and sques all information processed.
Extremists keep the rest of us in line. If you want an inch ask for a mile type of deal.
 
I think the media are quick to bash what they disagree with without facts. The fact that Tifton 85 is a Hybrid, GM or a native grass really has nothing to do with why those cattle died.
 
A mysterious mass death of a herd of cattle has prompted a federal investigation in Central Texas.
 

Latest posts

Top