They are genetically engineering the American Chestnut...

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

The American Chestnut Foundation has been working for years to breed blight resistance into the American Chestnut by crossing and back crossing Asian breeds. (Japanese, Chinese and Korean varieties.) This article isn't the best (96 and 6 are not 100) and disturbs me about GM work.
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32743/title/American-Chestnut-to-Rise-Again/

[el_bryanto]

1. Aren't all modern crops the result of Genetic engineering of one sort or another?

"Hmmm - that was a good tomato bush - I'll be sure to plant seeds from that one - but this scrabby one over here I'll turn into fertilizer."

In fairness my knowledge of farming is limited.

Bryant

[msongs]

2. cross breeding naturally is not the same as gene splicing/insertion nt

[el_bryanto]

3. What about grafting?

Again, not a botanist - but where they took branches from a producing tree and jam them onto a non-producing tree to get it to be more healthy and produce more fruit - is that acceptable?

Bryant

[Brother Buzz]

20. Grafting would effect no genetic change.

No long term solution.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

44. Grafting is done to select a tree for it's production, and put it on a sturdy rootstock

There are several apple rootstocks, some cause dwarf or semi-dwarf trees. With walnuts, an english walnut variety is most often grafted on a Black Walnut rootstock because they are more disease resistant. L. Burbank crossed an English walnut with a Black walnut and produced a "Paradox" walnut. To hybridize is to naturally mix genetic material. You can not Naturally mix fish with tomato plants, but they have done that with Genetic Engineering.

[HuckleB]

47. You're confounding a number of things, and using the naturalistic fallacy.

Why?

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

54. I was answering a question, what is "confounding" about that answer?

Are you employed by Monsanto? And what do you imagine is a fallacy about what I said?

[HuckleB]

63. You weren't answering anything.

You were confusing a number of things, and now you are using more logical fallacies and a ridiculous personal attack.

Do you care about the scientific process?

If you do, cut the crap.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

66. I have found you are the one on attack,

I have grafted trees and know what I spoke about.

[HuckleB]

71. I have grafted many plants, but that has nothing to do with the discussion.

Why can't you answer anything? It's bizarre.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

78. Maybe you ate GM material, and it explains your bizarre behavior?

You may become the first person I put on ignore.

Post #3 asks about grafting, and is it acceptable, Post #20 answers it and my Post #44 explains it further. You come in on Post #47 with "Naturalistic fallacy" B.S. When I ask what is "fallacy" you are the person who "Fails to answer a question."

You must be having a discussion in your head that is not part of this thread.

[HuckleB]

82. I would be proud to have you put me on ignore.

Since you cannot respond to one of my posts without a pointless personal attack, and/or a pseudo-science line of hooey.

Enjoy your fantasies!

[ChairmanAgnostic]

55. maize, corn, has been subjected to thousands of years of forced breeding, cross-breeding, and more

Today's corn has little in common with the early stalks that barely fed our ancestors.

Same goes with animals, fruits, (How DO seedless oranges reproduce, anyway?) and other crops.

The key difference is time. What used to take years, even decades of work to see change and improvement, can be done in one crop, on many different levels, trying hundreds of ideas out at the same time. The speed with which we can change the code of food sources is mind boggling - and therein lies the danger.

A dangerous hybrid would not have reared its ugly head so quickly or easily under older technologies. Today, we can come up with a monster crop without any warning, and quite possibly out of our control.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

61. Animal breeding can be considered "forced" but more often is refered to as "selected"

Most vegetable crops were "selected" too. The seed from more productive plants was saved. Cross-breeding plants is a more modern development. I collected some "Green Dent" corn at the Heirloom Seed Expo last month in Santa Rosa, CA.

I don't think there is much worry about a 'dangerous hybrid' but I do have lots of concern about inserting genetic material from unrelated plants, or animals into crops.

[cpwm17]

4. It would be great if they are successful

I hope I live long enough to see the return of this important tree.

[HuckleB]

5. Indeed. It would be awesome.

[HuckleB]

6. A much more lengthy article on this from Nature.

http://www.nature.com/news/plant-science-the-chestnut-resurrection-1.11504

Very cool stuff.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

53. That is a better article than the one I posted, but

I don't understand why he says "Progress with all three approaches" when he has only mentioned two, Hybrids and genetically modified. I'm not OK with GM foods.

[HuckleB]

62. I understand your beliefs.

Please read the article again, if you don't understand what is being discussed.

[bananas]

94. "Other researchers are trying to attack the blight with viruses" is the third approach. nt

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

95. OK, I had heard that there was some biological suppressor in Europe

that gave the trees there some resistance to the blight. And that they had tried to entroduce that to the trees on the East coast, but were not having any luck with it spreading.

By the way, a woman brought us a book at the farmers market today, "American Chestnut, The Life, Death, and Rebirth of a Perfect Tree" by Susan Freinkel.

[DiverDave]

77. That was VERY cool

I hadnt a clue about this.
If I was to see those trees in that pic today, it would freak me out.
BIG, man, I grew up in Oregon and the old growth trees were just as big, but a CHESTNUT tree??

The fact they are using a gene from corn is ok by me.
Man, what trees...

[formercia]

7. That should be 'Selective Breeding', not Genetic Engineering.

Nothing new there.

[Confusious]

86. One of the other ways

is through genetic engineering.

I had to read the article to find it, it's not in the excerpt.

[MineralMan]

8. Under a spreading chestnut tree, the village smithy stands.

That's an image that can no longer be seen in this country. Perhaps someday, it will again, and street vendors will sell roasted chestnuts from US trees in NYC.

It's been a long, long time. The chestnut tree was an American symbol of strength and endurance. We could use a symbol like that again, I think.

http://www.bartleby.com/102/59.html

[yawnmaster]

9. Selective breeding are the ones being released at this time, not GM...

the future GM on this doesn't worry me.
They will be doing the same thing selective breeding does but in a more controlled manner.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

67. You could never breed wheat, peppers or grapes with Chestnuts.

From a link in post #6:
"More than 1,100 kilometres to the north, researchers are experimenting with chestnuts that contain genes thought to provide resistance, which were taken from Chinese chestnuts as well as plants such as wheat, peppers and grapes. At the State University of New York in Syracuse, plant pathologist Bill Powell and forest biologist Chuck Maynard have planted some 600 transgenic trees for field trials of disease resistance. A transgenic variety with a wheat gene for the enzyme oxalate oxidase, which disarms the fungus, has already shown resistance in the field."

[rox63]

10. If it can bring back a tree that was virtually wiped out

I have no problem with it.

[HopeHoops]

11. Cross-breeding is an ancient practice. What worries me is laboratory GMOs.

[HuckleB]

12. What does something being "an ancient practice" have to do with anything?

http://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/appeals/appeal-to-tradition/

[HopeHoops]

17. Cross-breeding is natural, and occurs naturally as well. Genetic modification is NOT natural.

The GMO industry is inserting genes from unrelated organisms into the food supply to not only attempt to solve problems but also to render them incapable of reproduction. When those cross pollinate with heirloom crops, it leaves the entire crop contaminated. Monsanto is obviously the elephant in the room here, but they aren't the only ones doing it.

Cross-breeding, intentional or otherwise, is how plants evolve. It's how we get new varieties of roses. It's why you need to keep some distance between your sweet peppers and hot peppers. It doesn't involve a laboratory, just the plants and their pollinators, be it human, insect, or bird.

And no, it isn't a logical fallacy. GMOs absolutely CAN NOT be created by natural processes. They're inserting genes from fish and who knows whatever else into food crops. That's not natural. But cross-breeding has been going on since the beginning of time, with humans helping the process only recently in the general scheme of things.

[HuckleB]

22. Your just expanding on the fallacy of the ancients by offering up the natural fallacy.

It's all very meaningless. Logic and science needs actual meaning and definitions and evidence.

[HopeHoops]

28. Evidence? Ever grow a sweet pepper near a habanero plant? And what fallacy?

[HuckleB]

31. I told you what fallacy.

Oh, and your red herring is yet another logical fallacy.

Please look them up.

[HopeHoops]

36. Wait a minute. Are you insinuating that lab-inserted genes are equivalent to cross-pollination?

Seriously?

[HuckleB]

40. No.

Now you're trying to put words in my mouth.

Seriously, look up the fallacies I have identified. Learn them. They are important in terms of understanding the world and how one can be fooled.

[Odin2005]

80. Lateral gene transfer occurs in nature.

Oh, and "natural is good, artificial is bad" is a fallacious argument.

[HuckleB]

85. Indeed, but I don't think he/she cares.

[HopeHoops]

89. Well, I'll admit there are pros and cons to both, but artificial is playing with fire.

We do the same thing with tree grafting. Bradford pears are a prime example - they're going to explode at some point because the root stock isn't compatible with the graft in the long-run. The only real advantage is rapid growth, which is both why developers use them and why they eventually explode. There's no genetic modification involved, but that's just NOT a good way to play God.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

18. Hybrid plants do not destroy insects that are pollinators

And they don't cause cancers in animals that eat them. Killing off pollinators and giving cancers to rats is the result of GM corn. It should never have been done and it should stop being done.

[HuckleB]

24. So, you think debunked preliminary studies are extremely meaningful.

The GM Corn Rat Study
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-gm-corn-rat-study/

I don't.

[HopeHoops]

34. I've wondered if it has contributed to colony die offs. I think lawn poisons have.

We had more honey bees (and bumbles) in our yard this year than the entire rest of the neighborhood combined. We don't use a lawn poison company, but almost everyone else does. They come for the weeds (like clover) and aren't offended by our vast array of flowers and vegetables. It was a really great feeling. We went two years without seeing more than a couple of honey bees. And I can't remember seeing more bumbles. It was an awesome year.

[HuckleB]

37. We've always had plenty of flowers and veggies, less grass every year, as have our neighbors.

Few to none use any nasty insecticides, and the bees have been here for decades. Bees aren't stupid, with where they want to go. Still, one has to understand that anecdotes don't tell much.

[HopeHoops]

41. Anecdotes, perhaps not, but when all of the birds and bees (no pun intended) are in YOUR yard...

... it does make you wonder if there's a reason for that. The homogeneous green yards turn brown by early August (and the lawn companies STILL throw down the one thing they don't need - more nitrogen). Ours stays green all year round. Okay, most of it is clover, dandylion, and who knows what other kinds of weeds, but there's still a healthy supply of grass. Even in the middle of winter it is green while all of the other lawns have gone brown.

And THANK YOU for not using lawn poisons!!! It isn't just about the wildlife. It's also about not supporting the industry that produces the stuff, and providing food for the critters. Those poisons also kill feed insects.

As for the bees, PA was hit hard by colony collapse and it ruined a lot of beekeepers. Rows of hives would die off within a few days. For people who make their living raising them, that's a major issue. It's not just for honey either. Beekeepers transport their hives to orchards in need of pollination (for a fee, obviously) and without the hives, no income. For a lot of them, the honey is the least important part of their business.

I was just so happy to see them back in force this year. We actually had to dodge them in the yard to avoid stepping on them. Funny thing though, my wife's lavender plant (about 6' in diameter now) is a bumble magnet - easily 100 at a time. They also like the basil flowers (which you can't snip off fast enough). We're making pesto on Wednesday - like a lot of it.

[HuckleB]

43. I'm confused. You agree, but then you don't.

Further, I've never been anywhere where all the birds and bees are in one yard. Yeah, it's an anecdote, but...

[HopeHoops]

46. I wasn't either when I was a kid. Nobody poisoned the lawns then. I like your environment.

We're in a, well, basic middle-class neighborhood - two story houses with basements and garages. Our house is, um, the "farm" so to speak. We feed ourselves well out of it (and have a SHITLOAD of potatoes to dig soon). There are always tools and wheelbarrows out and about. One of the neighbors behind us put up a bunch of trees and hedges to avoid seeing our yard, but hey, we're fundamentally rural. The soil sucks - shale. I worked hard on establishing the gardens and they grow well, but you can't even put a full-size shovel into the ground without hitting shale. I hate shale.

It is true though. The birds swarm to our yard and the bees don't have much elsewhere to go. We provide what they need and they reciprocate. OOOHH! The flickers had a brood this year!!! They're all over the place. Did you know they're the only woodpecker that feeds from the ground? Beautiful birds. We are also well-visited by bluebirds, despite the fact that our bluebird box was taken over by sparrows every damn time. I finally took it down. We'd get a bluebird clutch and the sparrows would throw the chicks out. Aggressive little bastards. I digress.

As I said, our neighborhood is one of those places where lawn weenies mow diagonally for the mow pattern, not because it is an efficient way to do it. The Scott's and other lawn poison trucks are a regular feature, as are the water-cooler jug trucks (despite the fact that our water is excellent). We don't exactly fit in. I like to sit in a chair in the yard and yell, "SLOW DOWN - AND STAY OFF MY LAWN!" at cars that are going too fast (usually women in SUVs and minivans, not kids).

But hey, you have to live somewhere, right?

[HuckleB]

51. It is difficult in many parts of the country.

It's easy to use weed and feed and have green grass. It takes more work, but offers many more rewards to plant a garden with food and flowers. Luckily, where I live, few of us want to mow our lawns, so we don't water them. Now, that means they're still plenty green until the end of July. In most years, we get a mow break in August and September, but the lawn comes back green as can be with the rains of October. (We're still waiting for them this year.)

What it tells me is that we all need to learn to grow what makes sense with where we live. Grass seed in a big industry here, because grass is easy to grow, yet, maybe because of that, we don't much care about the grass. Hmm.

I may have to ponder this as a philosophical issue.

Hmm.

[HopeHoops]

56. ROFLMAO! Yeah, I guess you could get sick of it that way. We rarely mow either.

We keep it high and mow on a high setting. We never water it. My next-door neighbor on one side mows at least once a week (including today) and the one on the other mows his down to "buzz cut" level with a riding mower. We mow when it's getting to the point where the 7.5 HP mower might have a problem with it.

The garden comes first - it feeds us. My wife's currently pulling off basil leaves and has about 8 quarts of it harvested already. We'll be busy making pesto Wednesday night. REALLY busy. Like I said, we don't really fit in, but NOBODY complains when we bring them excess fresh produce! My wife trades produce and herbs for farm-raised eggs with a woman at her work. Actually, the woman at her work just wants to unload them because the chickens produce too many, but my wife insists on compensating her in some way.

[HuckleB]

64. I have a 20-year-old push mower. It's a good work out, but...

I'd rather go for a hike.

[HopeHoops]

88. Our 20+ year old push mower is only about 16" wide. It would take forever.

The gas mower has a 22" deck and I've got a 18" electric as backup. The gas one is awesome. It's got an electric starter motor (battery) for the B&S 7.5hp, rear wheel drive (large rear wheels), one-handle height adjustment, rear bagger (I don't use), and four speeds (two speed grips, two settings each). The electric has the flip-over handle so you don't have to turn it around and fuck with the power cord when you hit the border. It's also a twin-blade housing. As for the push mower, it's in storage right now, but it still works fine. I just have to sharpen the blades.

We've also got a SCREAMING old tool I've never seen before, but it works too. I found it in somebody's trash many years ago and "liberated" it. It has a wooden handle with handlebars. The tool part is a wheel (about the size of a training wheel) that spins a push mower type wheel about 5" long and also has a knife blade on the underside. It edges at the same time as it trims the grass just to the side of the walkway. Brilliant invention and it works really well. I'm amazed that nobody has come up with an electric version.

The other edger we have (manual) is a foot-pedal at the end of a handle with a curved blade along the bottom. Line it up, step down, move on - and made in the USA! I forget the company name, but it's the same one that made our dandylion puller - think of a small tomato cage that squeezes in like a tree extractor. Again, just step down and pull. It gets almost all of the root every time. We only use it in garden beds, but it works like a charm.

I'd love to say we still use just the push mower, but even with a 22" gas mower the yard takes over an hour (and is often rather thick). We used almost all of the time in New Hampshire because the "soil" was just rock and sand. What little grass there was grew tall, but not thick. Actually, it didn't even look like a "lawn". On the plus side, it was covered in snow for half of the year so mowing wasn't necessary. It's almost mid October and we have to mow again here. (groan)

[NickB79]

91. Actually, they frequently do contribute to pollinator deaths

Many hybrids, especially many ornamentals like flowers, don't produce pollen, or produce very small quantities of it. Since so many of these are planted today in place of native plants, and since the flowers look inviting, pollinators like bees waste large amounts of time searching in vain for pollen, to the point that the health of the colony is impacted.

[4th law of robotics]

23. Very little about agriculture is natural

don't believe me?

Try to find a field of spinach (and just that) in nice little rows in the wild.

[HopeHoops]

29. I have enough trouble getting a row of spinach to grow without the rabbits mowing it down.

[4th law of robotics]

33. Well those rabbits were modified by monsanto

natural rabbits would never bother your gardens.

Monsanto engineered them in the 50s to enjoy produce from individual gardens so they could sell their special rabbit resistant seeds.

[HopeHoops]

35. Impossible. If Monsanto was involved, they wouldn't be able to reproduce so you'd have to buy more..

... each year. Not that we need more. They're EVERYWHERE! "BEWARE THE WERERABBIT!" (Wallace and Grommit reference).

Actually, the rabbits are much more of a hazard to the beans, peas, and beets. Despite popular belief, they leave the carrot tops alone. Curiously, they also rarely bother the lettuce. But the fuckers LOVE spinach (even though it's not good for them - too high in iron). They also like nibbling the tips off of the onions and shallots, but that doesn't seem to have an impact on the productivity of the beds.

[Fumesucker]

13. I for one welcome our new American Chestnut overlords..

Well, somebody had to say it..

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

19. The American Chestnut was the Redwood of the East Coast, in that it was the overstory tree.

The Chestnut tree was 1/4th of the East coast forest. One out of every four trees was a Chestnut. They were rot resistant and could be used as rail road ties and fence posts. Some log cabins still exist made of the American Chestnut. I look forward to their return, but NOT GENETICALLY ENGINEERED TREES.

[HuckleB]

38. That seems like a very extreme viewpoint.

GE is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. It's time for science minded Democrats to step back. Please.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2012/09/are_gmo_foods_safe_opponents_are_skewing_the_science_to_scare_people_.2.html

[Ikonoklast]

42. Yeah! Look what happened when they tried that with apple trees!

[NutmegYankee]

49. Then you don't support their return.

The trees must have the the genetic resistance to the blight, or they die. It's that simple.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

57. I support the return, I have two orchards of American and Hybrid trees

But I am totally against GMO food, trees, animals or plants. I believe life evolved, and did so in a relationship with the environment. Mixing life forms unnaturally is likely to lead to collapse of life itself.

[4th law of robotics]

58. In the grand scheme of things agriculture v no agriculture

is a far greater change in the natural order of things than GM agriculture v non-GM agriculture.

[HuckleB]

73. +1

[NutmegYankee]

59. It's cross breeding, which occurs in nature and has been used by humanity for 1000's of years.

Sure, one group is trying to insert the Chinese genes via Genetic engineering, but the result is the same. A hybrid American Chestnut with the height but the resistance.


Drop the paranoia.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

68. In post #6, HuckleB posts a link, a paragraph is posted in Message text:

"More than 1,100 kilometres to the north, researchers are experimenting with chestnuts that contain genes thought to provide resistance, which were taken from Chinese chestnuts as well as plants such as wheat, peppers and grapes. At the State University of New York in Syracuse, plant pathologist Bill Powell and forest biologist Chuck Maynard have planted some 600 transgenic trees for field trials of disease resistance. A transgenic variety with a wheat gene for the enzyme oxalate oxidase, which disarms the fungus, has already shown resistance in the field."
Nature can not cross breed wheat, peppers or grapes with Chestnuts. (It's not a matter of how much paranoia you stir into the mix...or not.)

[NutmegYankee]

69. I still fail to see the problem. nt

[HuckleB]

72. I don't think there is a problem.

But...

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

75. the first link in a "Dangers of Genetically Modified Plants" search brought this:

http://www.safe-food.org/-issue/dangers.html

That is from 2001, here is one from this year:
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/01/the-very-real-danger-of-genetically-modified-foods/251051/

Which contains among other things:
"In 1999, a group of scientists wrote a letter titled "Beyond Substantial Equivalence" to the prestigious journal Nature. In the letter, Erik Millstone et. al. called substantial equivalence "a pseudo-scientific concept" that is "inherently anti-scientific because it was created primarily to provide an excuse for not requiring biochemical or toxicological tests."

Here is another link:
http://www.naturalnews.com/028245_GM_food_side_effects.html

And another, about Prop. 37 in California:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/annie-spiegelman/prop-37-california-_b_1944155.html?utm_hp_ref=green&ir=Green

[NutmegYankee]

76. Good grief.

If the anti-fungal effects were that bad, the Chinese chestnuts would be inedible. It's one thing to make plants that survive herbicides, it's another to introduce specific genes (already found naturally in some varieties) into a tree.

Once again - paranoia.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

79. I have no problem with cross-breeding plants and trees

But when animal DNA or other plant DNA (wheat, peppers or grapes) are put into chestnuts it a new thing. Some people are alergic to wheat. Chestnuts contain all the amino acids needed for health, like hemp seeds, and making it something people may be alergic to would ruin it as a food source.

[NutmegYankee]

83. How would it ruin it as a food source?

People are allergic to wheat - I eat wheat bread.
People are allergic to Nuts - I eat peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
People are allergic to grapes - See above.

And what they react to in wheat is not what would be in the Chestnuts. There is a good chance that people allergic to nuts will be allergic to Chestnuts anyway.

[HuckleB]

84. And yet you can't explain why you have a problem with other procedures.

That's very interesting. Science is a process. It is not evil. Please don't pretend otherwise.

Thank you.

[NickB79]

92. Sorry to break it to you, but you've got some mixed life forms inside you

Research how mitochondria came to be in your cells, for just one example.

[Nine]

30. X-D

[Botany]

14. this is called hybridizing ....

.... THIS IS NOT GENETIC ENGINEERING.

They do this to tomatoes, sheep, corn, wheat, and african violets too.

[X_Digger]

15. Nobody wants to eat 'heirloom corn'..

Seriously, though, it drives me nuts that folks continue to confuse selective breeding, hybridization, and genetic engineering.

I doubt that there's many vegetables we grow (and certainly animals we've domesticated) that haven't been selectively bred and/or hybridized.

[HuckleB]

16. It's easy to create fear and confusion.

As easily noted by Romney's debate "performance," any food issue of note, vaccinations, global warming, etc...

What's hard is getting people to understand the boring details of the science.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

21. There are several posts about this trouble with Genetically Modified crops

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021426181

Sustaining life is not a Boring thing to understand.

[HuckleB]

26. I'm aware of those posts.

I'm also aware that it's impossible to discuss the reality of GE/GMO science at DU.

PS: That study has been shown to be faulty to no end: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-gm-corn-rat-study/

Also, it is but a preliminary study, most of which contradict each other.

[4th law of robotics]

25. If you read the article it says these are hybrids

it falsely conflates that with GM.

[HuckleB]

27. And what if the trees currently growing were GMO?

Why would that matter?

[4th law of robotics]

32. It wouldn't

but this attempt to muddy the waters is obviously a blatant gambit to stoke fears.

[HuckleB]

39. Indeed.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

60. That is a very poor article, but check the Nature article in post #6

This paragraph appears:
"More than 1,100 kilometres to the north, researchers are experimenting with chestnuts that contain genes thought to provide resistance, which were taken from Chinese chestnuts as well as plants such as wheat, peppers and grapes. At the State University of New York in Syracuse, plant pathologist Bill Powell and forest biologist Chuck Maynard have planted some 600 transgenic trees for field trials of disease resistance. A transgenic variety with a wheat gene for the enzyme oxalate oxidase, which disarms the fungus, has already shown resistance in the field."

So there are GM Chestnuts, the author of the first article just doesn't present his information well.

[HuckleB]

74. Ah, but you didn't know that, until I posted an article with more than a couple paragraphs.

And, of course, there is no evidence that there is a problem with those trees, so, please stop. Science. Learn it.

[HuckleB]

45. Rachel Carson’s dream of a science-based agriculture ...

Rachel Carson’s dream of a science-based agriculture may come as a surprise to those who believe that sustainability and technology are incompatible.
http://scienceblogs.com/tomorrowstable/2012/09/24/rachel-carsons-dream-of-a-science-based-agriculture-may-come-as-a-surprise-to-those-who-believe-that-sustainability-and-technology-are-incompatible/

A very worthy read for anyone. Really. Anyone.

[NutmegYankee]

48. There is no other option. The original tree is nearly exinct from the blight.

I'm a supporter of the effort. I'd love to see the next generation rest under the shade of a chestnut tree.

[Nevernose]

50. I've been following chestnut research for a decade or more

The history of the American chestnut is really fascinating.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

52. Crossbreeding is not the same as Genetic Engineering!

If you cross a poodle and a lab to get a labradoodle, that's not genetic engineering. That's cross-breeding, and it's as old as agriculture. All mules, for example, are the result of cross-breeding a horse and a donkey, since mules are almost always sterile and can't have their own baby mules.

You might even find two animals or plants that have the same trait and breed them to each other to ensure the continuation of that trait, but that's still not genetic engineering. That's selective breeding. For example, the hairless cat breeds were created by finding cats who had the same hairless mutation and breeding them to one another until all the offspring had that trait.

But cross-breeding always occurs among closely related species. You might cross-breed two varieties of dog, but you wouldn't cross-breed a dog and a cat. It wouldn't work, not even if you tried to produce a litter of puppy-kittens with normal egg and sperm in a test-tube.

It would be genetic engineering if someone inserted the genes from one species into the genes of an entirely unrelated species in the lab.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

70. Thank you,

and like dogs and cats can not breed, peppers, wheat and grapes can not breed with Chestnuts.

(Mentioned in the link in Post #6.)

[FSogol]

65. Get SyFy on the phone! I give you Mega-Chestnut vs. Gatoriod!

The story starts with a big breasted scientist wearing jean cuts off and white tank top, driving her roofless Jeep Wrangler when he is stopped by an attractive Sheriff's Deputy driving a beat-up truck....



"What could possibly go wrong?" he said.

[Warren Stupidity]

81. Weird that. Some are being grown up the street from me and it is massively low tech.

The operation looks a lot like an orchard. Like a biotech operation: not so much.

[mitchtv]

87. Any news on the American elm?

i remember them lining the local streets, tall and majestic, then one day they cut them all down with the advent of Dutch elm disease.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

90. On GMO's: http://gmoawareness.org/gmo-facts/

[NickB79]

93. I'm always amazed by how few people know of lateral gene transfer

Anyone who does couldn't read this thread without laughing themselves silly at some of the comments here.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

96. Link to Institute for Responsible Technoloty

Just heard about this group on the radio, and a new movie that is out:
Genetic Roulette the Movie!
A film by Jeffrey M. Smith - Narrated by Lisa Oz

The link to their page: http://responsibletechnology.org/

Thought the above would help others understand my concern about the GMO issue.
Also: http://www.gmolabeling.org/

Yes on Prop 37 in California.
ADW

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

97. Thought I would add a link about toxic GMO crops for all those enablers who posted here

http://rt.com/usa/toxic-study-gmo-corn-900/

I just don't understand how some folks are so ProGMO.....

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

98. Russia Warns Global War over "Bee Apocalypse"

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1679.htm

Russia Warns Obama: Global War Over “Bee Apocalypse” Coming Soon