German pharmaceutical giant Bayer absorbs Monsanto

Seriously, have you SEEN how the average walmart-murican looks? That shouldn't even be possible. I DO NOT want that here. GMO gtfo my continent.

Good move for Monsanto, terrible move for Bayer.
Bad karma is bad.

So this is a way for Monsanto to breach the European market? Quite clever actually. And who owns Bayer today?

You can always eat from organic local farm- oh wait's those are banned by EU or have to fit the (((standards))).

And just like with VW and Mercedes, they'll CONVENIENTLY just happen to find some breach of contract or standards that will cost them millions and impede their business into the US.

(Please don't steal this merchant, it is my only possession left)

...

Thirding this. I can't even image that amount of money.

Shame the Amis stole the patent for Aspirin after WW2

...

...

Regardless of ownership, there is literally NOTHING good that can come of this. Save Bayer dismantling Monsanto, disclosing their altered health data, and using it as a precedent to establish a better laws protecting Europe and America from unknown risks like GMO.

how things always work out for them..

IG Farben has been liquidated since 2012, Bayer, Sanofi and BASF are its successors

No, please stay in murrica god fucking damn it. I don't want this shit here too.

So, uh, how big are the chances of that ever happening?

How big are the chances of giga-Jews not giga-Jewing?

...

Well fuck

indeed its a tragic sight i live right next to atlanta too. Although i must say ive seen an increase in organics around here people are starting to wake up to the whole ((( GMO ))) situation

GMOs are pretty much the future of industrial-scale agriculture, given the growth of "superweeds" resistant to all those lovely pesticides farmers used to douse their fields with.

Permaculture is really the only way any society on Earth is going to survive this shit I think

Bayer are fucking morons to do that.

Now that it is a GERMAN company the protection is gone. Soon after the takeover another Monsanto scandal will pop up, and suddenly the USA hand of protection will be gone and Bayer will be smack in the middle of the economic war against Germany. And the German government will not protect them like Bayer expects them to. Just like VW wasn't protected for shit when the (((USA))) launched the economic war.

Goodbye Bayer, you had a gun run. The clock is ticking, you'll be ripe for takeover in a few years. Enjoy being bought by (((them))).

Thank god we have a anti GMO law here in Austria.

FUCK YOU BAYER

superweeds are a consequence of monsanto's meddling shit. They are unheard of in Europe. Farmers have at least a couple of thousand years of empirical experience. (small scale crops, crop rotation, etc. ) . Use it.

That's basically what permaculture is user.

Permaculture is optimizing agricultural systems for permanence not production. Just because farmers 100 years ago were using their manure and compost doesn't mean they were practicing good permaculture with biodiversity and utilization of natural soil maintenance etc.

Permaculture may seem like almanac style common sense but it's actually the bleeding edge of farm science enabling humankind to do more with less than ever before.

OP your link is giving me 404 when I paste it and unbreak it; have another sauce:

archive.is/YxhH5

rt.com/business/359275-bayer-buys-monsanto/
should work now.

fuck. Left sage on.

Not at all dude. Permaculture means permanent agriculture. Annual crops like corn, beans, rice, potatoes are not permanent agriculture. Things like apple, pear, walnut, or pecan trees would be considered permanent agriculture because they will provide food for many years.

who knew?

Thanks, it does. Still, more sauce btter.

Enjoy starving to dead when the civil war happens.
Bayer just declared war on Murica.

You need to break this down more. How has Bayer declared war on us burgers? Is Bayer going to use their scientists to make GMO even more deadly or what?

The way I see things, the more fucked up shit gets in agriculture the more incentive there is to buy organic/ non gmo.

You faggots really need to check out Mark Shepard's new forest farm. That is the model that will feed earth for millennia.

Please no. ;_;

Fair enough, I might've been thinking of agroecology.

Those population growth statistics are based on the assumption that Africans have 10 children each for the next century, which simply isn't going to happen

The "Green Revolution" really was one of humanity's biggest mistakes

...

It's a logical consequence of the outcome of WW2.

Good with Trump in office we kick the sausage scoffing cunts out

LOOL dont worry. We wont be feeding niggers chestnut fed pork. They can have the weaponized corn and white people can eat organic perennials.

FAGGOT

Yes it will. If Western shitlibs like you keep feeding them.

How in the fuck did the trust busters allow this shit?

You should have been tipped off by the word (((humanity))). Dude is a shill, not a Holla Forumsack.

For the last decade GMOs have been pushed as the future of "agriculture" (i.e. industrially farmed monocultures) because we need to feed the Third World somehow!

No, it won't if current rates of top soil erosion continue (not to mention resource shortages in water and oil). Even whites going full cuck and growing food purely to feed Africans won't save them.

Yes, I'm a shill for being critical of industrial-scale agriculture which is one of the major causes of environmental erosion, has significantly boosted the Third World's population via the use of pesticides, fertilisers, and GMO crops, and has driven small farmers out of many Anglo countries in favour of giant industrial farms manned by legal and illegal Third Worlders "just doing the jobs white people don't want to do".

Did you mean (((Bayer))) OP?

god she's ugly

I didn't read your other post. What do you mean by "green revolution" then?

Okay, didn't know that was the orwellian term for destructive unsustainable industrial farming.

Ignore my post. I'm a faggot

And not the least bit funny or charismatic.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution

You can add the fuckface in pic related to the mess as well, with his exhortations to farmers to "get big or get out" and leading to the massive problems America is facing with King Corn.

Dude should be shot for crimes against humanity, if he wasn't dead already. Can you imagine how many paki child rapists or rapefugees in general his measures have sustained? This man has lots of blood on his hands.

Of course the root of all these problems is judaism and the outcome of WW2, though.

And to think, Norman Borlaug received the (((Nobel Peace Prize))) for his work.

Yeah I looked that up.

When you said "green revolution" I thought you meant sustainability. Turns out it was the Eternal Norwegian.

Reminder that Monsanto is rotten, but GMO as a concept isn't inherently bad.

interesting point but I don't think we would need to genetically engineer if we actually had people selectively breeding new varieties. The problem is we find a good variety like say red delicious apples and fucking no one plants any other apple trees besides red delicious apples.

So if we just had a handful of people actually breeding their own apple trees instead of buying red delicious apple seeds then we wouldnt need to GMO and we would have hundreds of new apple varieties.

Did the pear always wear a kippah?

lol because you kiddies have been fed a diet of gay nwo illuminati videos on youtube and think you know shit

Hello henrycorp & alts. Hows the weather in reddit/voat

Most GMOs are produced through selective breeding. More direct genetic manipulation is actually much more precise and has a lower chance of side effects.

The real world has proven this to be the opposite for quite a while, kike

games within games, user

Yea what kind of shilling is this?

Your actually trying to argue that splicing insect genes into a plant has a lower chance of side effect than selective breeding? Do you even know what selective breeding is? That just means growing a bunch of watermelons and keeping the watermelon seeds that taste the best or produce the most.

Never in my fucking days.. You better be getting paid or your seriously fucking brainwashed.

It begins

No, I'm just not an idiot. Directly inserting a gene is more accurate than using selective breeding for the same goal. Keep shilling for the Organic Jew, fags.

It will never work, though. Europeans demand quality in produce, if they just wanted size and value, they could have had that a long time ago. But the demand is quality, taste, etc., so unless this is a move to cater to retarded refugees, it won't become cancerous like in the US.

AaanD … there's the shill. GMO refers to transgenics . Conflating it with selective breeding ain't fooling anyone, nigga. Selective breeding is a slow, incremental process. It's giving a small push to nature. Evolution has all sorts of brakes that can prevent really fucked up shit from happening . You gonna stick a gene from a fish into a tomato and all the brakes are off.

fooledbyrandomness.com/pp2.pdf

'Monoculture in combination with genetic engineering dramatically increases the risks being taken.Instead of a long history of evolutionary selection, these modifications rely not just on naive engineering strategies that do not appropriately consider risk in complex environments, but also explicitly reductionist approaches that ignore unintended consequences and employ very limited empirical testing. Ironically, at a time when engineering is adopting evolutionary approaches due to the failure of top-down strategies, biologists and agronomists are adopting top-down engineering strategies and taking global systemic risks in introducing organisms into the wild."

I never said that I approved of how they handled the seeds. Monsanto is cancer and should be gassed.

The only brakes evolution has is whether or not an organism is viable.

You are correct by the way. However, the majority of pesticide resistant plants, for example, that people consider to be "GMO" are actually produced through selective breeding.

However, biological sciences and transgenics are not inherently bad. Just because the gene came from a fish or it seems "unnatural" to you doesn't mean it will kill you or give you cancer. There is nothing special for a gene in a fish encoding a protein versus a gene in a plant encoding a protein.

Killing also isn't inherently bad. Doesn't make is a positive thing.

You still haven't substantiated your kikeshill claim that direct genetic manipulation is safer than fucking crossbreeding. And you never will substantiate it, because you and I both know you are flat out wrong.

This thread reminded me of this documentary I saw a few days ago.

I think selective breeding is a lot safer than mix and matching cells from deprecate species but I can't help thinking that even selective breeding can go wrong. In order to get the muscular cows in the video they had to breed only cows with a faulty gene. The gene was supposed to balance the fat and muscle ratio. The end result of the selective breeding was a race of cows that had almost 0 percent body fat. My worry is that they are selectively keeping FAULTY genes. Couldn't this result in something bad?

Spell correction from different

Teddy roosevelts been dead for years toranon.

You know, if Ben Garrison himself was against GMO, we all should listen to him. That's a proof enough that this is a jewish invention to get rid of white people and make them weak.

Any pro-GMO poster is a degenerate shill that needs to be sent to concentration camp.

Doesn't yuroland have more antitrust and anti-GMO restrictions than burgerland? It always seems like your governments want a monopoly on fucking you over for themselves so they try to prevent corporations from doing it too.

REMINDER

Bayer are the company behind such scandals as HIV & Hep C laced medications to other countries, covered up reactions to medications and their most famous one; Thalidomide
This is one evil company enveloping another.

They put toxins from bacteria in corn to kill insects you idiot. They claim it has no effect on humans. They claimed the same thing about agent orange in the 70s and now they are trying to use one of the components of agent orange as an herbicide. Monsanto is kikes actively trying to make they goyim infertile.

EU lifted/relaxed those restrictions this year

I have always wanted to own a pharmaceutical company on par with Bayer

O shit what do those dubs mean

Does it mean it won't kill me or give me cancer?
This is reductionist babble. Chocolate comes from cocoa beans. Cocoa is a plant . Therefore chocolate is a salad.
Just because I play Russian roulette doesn't mean I'll die. But I DO NOT want to roll those dice. I mean, if the choice is between GMO and certain death, then of course we choose what is potentially harmful over what is certainly harmful. But we both know this is not the choice given.
Again, unwarranted reductionist. Viable relative to what? There's a whole ecosystem of interacting factors. If we change it in such a way that 'we' are no longer viable in the new state then that's that. It doesn't matter whether it was intentional or not. The point is we really DON'T want that to happen. You grow out of the edgy teen phase once you figure out that just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. The world exists outside your head, not inside it.

"…the evaluation of whether the genetic engineering of a particular chemical (protein) into a plant is OK by the FDA is based upon considering limited existing knowledge of risks associated with that protein. The number of ways such an evaluation can be in error is large. The genetic modifications are biologically significant as the purpose is to strongly impact the chemical functions of the plant, modifying its resistance to other chemicals such as herbicides or pesticides, or affecting its own lethality to other organisms, i.e. its antibiotic qualities. The limited existing knowledge generally does not include long term testing of the exposure of people to the added chemical, even in isolation. The evaluation is independent of the ways the protein affects the biochemistry of the plant, including interactions among the various metabolic pathways and regulatory systems—and the impact of the resulting changes in biochemistry on health of consumers.
The evaluation is independent of its farm-ecosystem combination (i.e. pesticide resistant crops are subject to increased use of pesticides, which are subsequently present in the plant in larger concentrations and cannot be washed away.
We should exert the precautionary principle here – our non-naive version – because we do not want to discover errors after considerable and irreversible environmental and health damage."

The guy butchered the basic process while making his point, but he's sort of correct.

Back when they started adding glyphosate resistance back in the 90's to crops, how they did it was they'd expose succeeding generations of soybeans to increasingly high levels of glyphosate, causing those who were resistant to the pesticide to evolve methods to deal with it. This is a normal breeding practice.
The problem is that while doing this, undesirable effects might happen like smaller yield or less resistance to other environmental factors. So what they did was keep track of the genes from generation to generation, isolate the specific gene used by the plant to break down glyphosate; then they'd take that gene and put it into a normal crop line, one that didn't have the undesirable aspects that happen when you breed for one specific trait.
Later on to cut costs, because that gene just encodes for a protein, they stuck it into crops other than soybeans.

Yeah PIP's are fucked up; that's part of why Monsanto is bad.

Nice strawman

Viable as in lives or dies, dumb ass. If you infect your environment with an invasive species (which happens all the time accidentally), Evolution Personified isn't going to reach out a helping hand and kill it off. Maybe you're suggesting that transgenics are immoral and god himself will smite those who participate?

Nice hypocrisy by the way, you accuse me of being a "reductionist" meanwhile you're losing your shit over ```EVERY GMO``` being ```ABSOLUTELY DEADLY```. The suggestion that maybe that isn't entirely true is clearly the work of a reductionist shill.

Clearly they can insert a gene to produce a dangerous alkaloid, I wasn't suggesting that they couldn't. I wasn't even suggesting that you even trust the kikes at the FDA.

Research which GMO products are dangerous yourself. Personally, I wouldn't eat GMO soy products. Some of them might be, most are not. For example the arctic apple example you keep giving is an example of a perfectly benign modification.

I realize that the direction I pointed my argument wasn't entirely consistent (for reasons below) but jesus dude.

Thank you.
It was 5 am and I'm an aero engineering student, not a bio major.

Lmao, now I look like a newfag.
I don't post often enough to know how to use this shit.

Yeah, EE here. My father was involved in some of the early academic experiments in the 80's before moving to founding a sequencing lab. Some of their first clients were the smaller agro companies who'd contract off the actual decoding part. Took highly specialized equipment back in those days.

Monsanto has done some shady shit, but I thin they're basic bitch NWO shit.

But you are a fucking idiot/ shill. I'm formally trained in genetics and have been an organic farmer/ gardener for 5 years..

Anyone can claim to be "formerly trained in genetics," sex ed doesn't count.

Reminder that GMO story is largely about ((centralizing control)) over seeds and how crops are produced. Shills are commonly deploying arguments to show themselves as the advancers of science as a cover. (And here we even see pushing of an inversion like "Organic Jews"…)

(Also isn't a huge merger like this sounds like centralization.)

I already made my argument about selective breeding vs cross species splicing. See

I have 2 years training at the University of Wisconsin Madison for genetics. I have been breeding fruit trees for 3 years and have grown just about every fruit and vegetable known to mankind. I am probably the most educated person on this entire board when it comes to edible plants.

I don't see the problem with GMO's.

Although, Monsanto seems to have had done alot of bad products. Their GMO's seem to have failed.

This outside my area of expertise but I do work in breeding endangered fauna. Thankfully there's no GMO pandas yet.

Also GMOs are largely about control through legal Jewry as I see it. The patents are nuts and so are the laws protecting them. Every country in the world needs sane laws regarding GM life.

Honestly there is not much use for GMO's. All we need is more people breeding fruit and nut trees/ shrubs. We can actually produce much better genetics from selective breeding than GMO's could ever dream. Where do you think all the good apple/ cherry trees came from in the first place? Selective breeding… The only thing GMO's have ever given us is roundup resistant corn and beans.

Intellectual property is cancer, especially for shit like seeds and "discovered" genes.

Oh, that.
I have already admitted that my knowledge on this subject is fairly low compared to someone who has a background in it.

Had it not been 5 am however, I would have been quick to point out that techniques that do not require modern technology, such as hybridization (which is accomplished through grafting usually, right?) have produced crops like seedless watermelons, grapes, and so on.

Furthermore, you missed the point by comparing apples and oranges (pardon the pun), as user said before, if you can isolate the gene from the plant that produces the effect you want, you can splice it into another plant or an unaltered version of the same plant.

Obviously having plants produce new toxins is not okay, I never said it was. However, I would like to reiterate that just because a gene comes from another species, does not necessarily mean it's dangerous. You could splice in a gene from a plant that would be just as dangerous as one from an animal.

If I absolutely had too choose only two edible plants for the rest of my life, what would be best?

Nature doesn't have profit built in, GMO's do.

That's all there is to it.

I think hugelkultur holds tremendous promise for small, decentralized farming.

Sorry, I meant kingdom* in that context. To clarify, I mean that splicing in a gene from another plant species should be done with the same precaution (not more or less) than from an animal species.

Why not just translate it and call it hill culture?

A real life Umbrella Corporation. Creating an army of zombies using GMOs and vaccines.

Probably because when translated it is simple "hill culture" or "hill mound" which isn't as precise a name to suit the english language?

It was never more free from it than the US was. The whole world has been using gmos in one form or another for a long time.

Prolly chestnuts and walnuts. As far as nutrition at least, chestnuts are high in carbs and walnuts are high in protein.

You should first try and eat the safest food (shit thats not been sprayed or preserved). Then you should try and switch your diet over to perennial plants. **So corn and beans are examples of annual crops (something that only lives one year and then dies). But fruit trees, nut trees, grapes, currants etc are examples of perennial plants (just means they live and will produce for many years).

The reason you want perennial over annual is its much better on the environment. With annuals you have to clear the field to bare dirt to plant your seeds and then spray 2 or 3 times.. year after year after year. But with perennials you plant it once and wait a couple years until its ready to harvest.

It's actually called "Hügelbeet" in German, so it's not a real loan word

Once again, not trying to hate but what happens when you get a thunderstorm and it rains an inch. %98 of the water is going to run off that hill and your plants on that mound aren't going to have enough water.

Water is the most important resource on a farm, many times more important that even the soil fertility. So you must manage your water wisely. These pics are examples of keyline design or swaling (basically just digging ditches on contour to catch the rainwater and give it time to soak in well).

I also figured that would be an issue. Couldn't you also just dig a hole to bury the logs and make the garden flat?

It's kikes.
And they're buying it with ECB funny helicopter money.

Thanks man. Way more than info than I expected and it is appreciated.

Again a good part of the idea behind GMO is to selectively breed for a single trait; such as size. Then splice the genes for size into a cultivar that say, is disease resistant, or tastes good.

There isn't a GMO plant out there with a wholly novel gene.

Yea you could but where are you going to get the logs and how are you going to move all that earth around without some serious heavy machinery.

If I had a bunch of logs laying around id just rent a mulcher and lay down woodchips 2 inches deep. It will turn into soil within a year or two just sitting on top anyway, plus it will keep you soil from drying out/ keep the weeds suppressed.

Yea thats the only decent use I see for GMO's. But the problem is almost nobody is breeding apples (or whatever) anymore. If we had people experimenting with new varieties we would have hundreds of giant and good tasting varieties without the need of splicing.

Do you see what im saying? The problem isn't that all genetic engineering is horrible, it's just totally unnecessary in producing new good varieties.

I was referring to the picture he posted, it looked like the mound was made by piling dirt onto some logs. If it's only for a garden or something then it would be pretty easy to rent a backhoe or something to dig that out, but the wood chips are probably still a better idea.

Never said that. Some GMO might be harmless. My point is we don't know which, and we CAN'T AFFORD to know.
If the food supply is localized, then some GMO gone bad would just fuck up the local population, spread a little, and remain within their isolated niche.

But GMO + monocultures + global distribution = disaster waiting to happen. By the time we figure out the long term effects of some GMO or other, it might have already crospollinated , or done wacky things to the ecosystem . I'm not arguing form a position of 'knowledge'.
Survival is more important than knowing which round holds the bullet.

Oh okay, I think I understand your position a bit better now. I still think that it would be better to do a bit of research into how that GMO was made and then make an educated decision for yourself on whether or not it's safe. However, I do agree that without any information, the safest decision is to choose to not consume that product.

ive done some academic research. Bt corn = harmless to humans (we think.) Roundup ready corn = hope you have health insurance. Massive tumors.

The problem as well is that they argue this stuff is for developing countries…and yet it has taken over NA agriculture to the point that they sue farmers and destroy generational seeds that were preserved so that only GMO remains.

It is shoved down our throats and were not allowed to know where it is in our foods. Never forget Monsanto is a jewish family.

Stormtards actually believe this.

Obongo and Shillary are all over Monsanto's dick. Like making the former CEO head of the FDA. I wonder if a Trump presidency spooked them?

This, though massive industrial farms are not so innocent.
Factory farms are also a huge issue, with the application and feeding of antibiotics taking precedence over a clean environment.
We now have superbugs resistant to our last ditch antibiotics thanks to the US and China doing this.
We need an industry overhaul and to redirect our subsidies to companies that do not practice this shit.

this
it's back to corporations making deals that fuck us, now and down the road. it seems like things are just becoming more and more conglomerated which is never a good thing for distribution of resources, local or otherwise.

i'm familiar with monsanto's history. i'm curious now about bayer's track record vs. the world, i just didn't really pay attention to them until now. our food supply was already getting fucked up enough, didn't really expect this though

rolling against aspirin in my asparagus

your trips bring me hope, but bribing exists

Ho-lee fuk.

Are monopoly laws still a thing?

...

It's going to happen, and it won't just be asprin, but (((asprin)))
Big Pharma kikes need to go back first.

TINFOIL TIME FELLAS

I've been thinking about this whole thing in terms of the election. Let's say America becomes great again along with Brexit and the like. The Rothschilds have been moving money out of America and now a German company owns Monsanto. What if this is leveraged against the American people should the EU be backed into a corner? The writing is already on the wall for that. It feels a bit dangerous for such a large part of the American food supply to be owned by a foreign entity. Could you imagine if someone like Merkel were able to sabotage the food supply?

Again, this is pure tinfoil territory. I realize that. It just kind of occurred to me that with everything lining up the way it is… well, this could be bad.

Fucking Germans.

If I want a company to control my food supply I would prefer it at least be American. Cunts.

this is actually great news.

It's a good move for Bayer. This way they can bypass every TTIP and constraints, not to mention regulation laws.

define FAULTY

Now you are going to tell me cyborg can shot lasers because of a FAULTY gene too, not a COOL 100% SUNGLASS gene.

Mutations are mutations, regardless if they happen because a new gene pops up, or a old one dies, or whomever the fuck this works.

Now, if this gene somehow ended up making the cow a little poisonous and we didn't figure it out yet, that's another story

...

Come on kids. Why do you think they are selling out now? They can see the writing on the wall and they know their company is dead within a decade. They could have focused on making teenage cat-girls a reality, but now they are getting blown the fuck out by the non-GMO movement. Europistan probably thinks they will be able to force feed their halal-GMOs to people.

Or you could just lay your logs in a square. and pile dirt on them. Like with a log cabin, only for mounds. Then there will be a low spot in the middle that will gather and hold water. Now please give me 1000000000000 dollars.

Bayer invented heroin bro

Well they invented the name, but the compound itself is just a morphine derivative (diamorphine is actual name) made 20 years prior to Bayer picking it up. Hell morphine's been known about for thousands of years, but only isolated and named 200 years ago

Don't lose sight. Monsanto and Bayer are not the only GMO companies. There's at least two others that need to get wiped out and very soon.