Non GMO vs GMO
let’s have a discussion, gmo helps in better spread distribution of food to people but can have ecosystem detriments
Non gmo is a more natural approach without harming the environment too too much, but is not viable in large populace circumstances
at 7 000 000 000 people organic isnt an option.
isn't this image wrong?
This
so, genocide?
>let’s have a discussion
What the fuck is this? Pol?
This is now a pepe thread.
Actually none GMO is arguably more harmful to environment. It requires more land and more resources like water and energy. In addition to this natural pesticides are not less harmful then genetic enhancements. With GMO you can keep pests away without hurting bees or other welcomed species. Overall natural crops are less efficient and as harmful to environment as GMO if not more.
that pic is bullshit
All produce and livestock are genetically modified you fucking fag. Theres a reason bananas don't look anything like they did in the 19th century, because we cross and selectively breed all of our food to make it less shit.
The problem is agri-corporation practices and widespread redundant use of pesticides
Was the debate organic or genocide?
all tomatoes are gmo.
you mean organic. almost all veggies and fruit we cultivate are gmo
>go to Yea Forums
>See this thread
>mfw
they both taste great in sandwiches
one has no taste
Are you fucking retarded? The largest produced GMO is engineered so the plant can survive MORE pesticides. You have no idea what the fuck you're talking about
meh
you watched the Kurzgesagt video didnt you? buddy, gmo is only thought to be bad at all is cause single moms need something to rant about in their spare time.
Not wrong but misinformed.
Organic looks the way it does because it's decomposing faster than the GM tomato.
Some would bullshit you into believing this can affect you. It cannot.
The way food is broken down and used in the body absolutely zero genetic material is passed on in any significant way.
Also, using energy and water isn't bad for the environment, retard. If that were so, bears would be terrible for the environment because they use a shit ton of both. What's bad is dumping synthetic pesticides everywhere to feed your hordes of Democratic welfare voting slaves cheap irradiated beef coated in dead ecoli
Cross breeding is not the same as injecting genes from a walrus into corn, you inbred retard nigger
there are too many people anyway, we could just get rid of africa since they're starving anyway and then the clean out the middle east to make room for civilized cultures, and that would solve our problem for the next few hundred years, as long as birth rates continue to decrease
>itt losers spout bullshit while citing nothing and claiming to be experts.
You dumb inbred nigger, the organic is covered in digestive healthy bacteria which is why it breaks down faster, as opposed to the gmo which is microbially dead and unhealthy. Have fun paying for probiotics.
Did nazis try to make GMO people?
these are the questions
do you even know what a gene is?
Found the triggered hippy faggot.
cleaning out africa, the ME and maybe pakistan/india to a degree would be enough to allow the birth rates in civilized parts of the world to start increasing again, so that eventually, the right people could continue human history
you don't live in reality do you?
autism
GMO is a broad term, excluding/euthanizing Untermenschen already goes in that direction
His question was "is the question organic vs genocide".
You either answer "no" and shut the fuck up because you sound like an idiot - or do anything else and sound like a fucking idiot.
You've chosen the second option.