/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5648046]

Do you faggots oppose GMO? Why or why not?

How is this NOT the next step to expanding the max population cap with current resources and technologies, similarly how the Bosch-Haber cycle raised it from ~2 Billion to ~6 or 8 billion, the GMO breakthroughs are expected to raise this even more.

[Anonymous No.5648052]

>expanding the max population cap
why would i want more niggers or pakis?

[Anonymous No.5648096]

So let me get this straight... the population of just about every developed country in the world has stagnated or started to decline, and we're supposed to come up for solutions for people who couldn't stop fucking like rabbits?

An expanding food supply only discourages population control. If we keep on expanding it, the world's population is going to be 16 billion by 2100. If you quit it with the GMOs, you also give people a reason not to have so many goddamn kids: they'll starve.

[Anonymous No.5648109]

>>5648096
Not to go full /pol/ but La-Quanda isn't going to stop having kids, for one the bitch doesn't use condoms and for two she gets more welfare.

[Anonymous No.5648114]

>>5648109
La-Quanda lives in a developed country

[Anonymous No.5648117]

Nope

It is like opposing tornadoes or gold mining

[Anonymous No.5648178]

>>5648096
Current models predict a stagnation around 10 billion. It will be reached at some point near 2060 and stay like that. The climate change, together with the singularity will fuck too much shit and there will be a huge change in human behavior, a la industrial revolution, with people drifting away from consumerism and either humanity will achieve a sustainable utopia like society, or it will perish.

www.futuretimeline.net

[Anonymous No.5648179]

Absolutely not.

[Anonymous No.5648256]

No. I do think companies like Monsanto do shitty things though, like suing farmers for copy right infringement because GMO crops they made were blown into neighboring fields that never bought seeds from Monsanto.

[Anonymous No.5648262]

>>5648046
Well for the last hundreds of millions of years, not one lifeform has been genetically modified in anyway, yet we somehow feel we have the right to change this. This is an issue of ethics, and /sci/ lacks ethical understanding. Take it up with /pol/.

Besides, GMO is more of a political issue anyway.

[Anonymous No.5648269]

>>5648262
Was that supposed to come off as cogent?

[Anonymous No.5648281]

>>5648262
>Besides, GMO is more of a political issue anyway.
This

The reason many people in /sci/ oppose GMO is because of copyright and patent abuse.

[Anonymous No.5648297]

It's a bad idea to clone all of your plants because they'll get wiped out by one disease.

I think the bigger issue would be the chemicals leeching into the plants and environment.

[Anonymous No.5648302]

>>5648262
>Ethics
Get that shit out of here.
Unless it prevents harm to a person, your 'ethics' are doing nothing positive, and can go fuck itself.

[Anonymous No.5648594]

>>5648262
> last hundreds of millions of years
>not one lifeform has been genetically modified in anyway,

Do you even evolution?

[Fruitarian No.5648601]

>Wheat can produce 3-4 million calories per acre and potatoes can produce 6-8 million calories per acre. ... I got 288 pounds of fruit off the first tree and my orchard is on a grid of 200 trees per acre. That means this tree produced the equivalent of 57,600 pounds per acre. At 236 calories per pound for raw apples, this equals 13,593,600 calories per acre for an apple tree producing less than 300 pounds per tree. This is 3.4 times the calorie production for wheat and 1.7 times the value of potatoes (using 4 million calories per acre for wheat and 8 million for potatoes - the upper end of the spread). ... Now let's consider commercial apple production. ... At half a bin, or 500 pounds per tree and with 200 trees per acre, the calorie value of commercial apple production jumps to 100,000 pounds per acre, or 23.6 million calories per acre. This is nearly 3 times the calorie yield of the most optimistic calorie value for potatoes and almost 6 times the most optimistic calorie value for wheat! ... Planting trees is an investment in the future and it takes 4-5 years for production to come on, but once the apples start producing, the amount of high-quality food produced is astonishing. Apples do take some management, but the labor costs are quite low compared to vegetables. If there is a perfect food, from both a farming and a consumer perspective, it is an apple.

[Anonymous No.5648605]

>>5648302

[Anonymous No.5648611]

>>5648262
For the last hundreds of millions of years, nobody went onto /sci/ and posted "Well for the last hundreds of millions of years, not one lifeform has been genetically modified in anyway, yet we somehow feel we have the right to change this. This is an issue of ethics, and /sci/ lacks ethical understanding. Take it up with /pol/." But you somehow feel you have the right to change this?

This is an issue of ethics, and you clearly lack ethical understanding.

[Anonymous No.5648625]

>>5648605