When will it die? Monsanto myths

It is illegal to haul untarped loads of grain in Saskatchewan. Also, the way trucks are loaded with canola, it is not like it is heaping and overflowing the truck sides, it is a good foot or more down the sidewalls from the. top, otherwise you are illegal for overweight. My point being, for enough seeds to "jump out" and even get to the roadside is quite questionable. As well, volunteer canola does not grow in ditches, and roadsides in the first place, because in saskatchewan, these roadsides are heavily grassed, and a canola plant simply would NEVER be able to grow up through the grass. your idea of roadsides, and what reality is, are two different things. "roadside" would mean monsanto took samples from schmeisers field edges, not in the ditch of the road, as canola simply can not exist there...

You saying its NEVER done?
And I've seen the way grain trucks are loaded and unloaded. Its not a clean process. At least around here, its common to see piles of grain laying around the roadsides come harvest time.

Now another factor comes in which is contrary to previous excuses to further muddy the waters. The truck route thing was to give a source of pollen. The trucks were presented as dashing down the roads leaking a steady stream of canola seed all the way from the farms to the mills. That canola then sprouted and grew the following year and contaminated his seed field. That pig definitely didn't fly.

Seeds spilled in 1996 would not grow until 1997. They could then produce crossed seed for planting only in 1998. No plants in 1997 could have been RR in his field unless their parent plants were also RR. If such a field were sprayed with Roundup in 1997, it would have resulted in 100% loss. That is why the time frame is so very important. What was claimed was impossible. Had he waited one or two years, he may well have won his case.

99.999% of the public wouldn't know anything about growing canola if it jumped up and bit them. The best that I can ascertain is that only 2 current HT members have grown it and one did so before it as canola. I don't know why God did it to me but I'm the one who grew it as rapeseed.

Martin

Oh, another excuse that he could have used was that he swept up enough seed from the highway to plant his seed plot. Problem with that is that he would then know that he was not planting his own custom line which he had kept going for years. So, that was also a pig that wouldn't fly.

Martin

There were indeed RR plants in his field in 1997, as per his testimony. If his neighbors grew it in 1996, then there is a very good chance pollen could have drifted from his neighbors field, and thus plants grown in 97, using the previous years seeds, could very well have the RR gene within them.

NO! We've already been there. There are no "ifs" involved, only facts. Neighbor fields did not come into play so dismiss that entirely. Only that which was spilled by the road was used as an initial excuse for contamination. (You already cited that in another reply.) There could have been RR seeds forming in plants in 1997 but those plants would not have been RR since only the seeds would have carried the gene.

Martin

Bill Clinton never had sex with Monica, PER HIS TESTIMONY

__________________
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

It is known that others in his township were growing RR canola in 1996. And pollen spreads. That is what it does. Folks making hybrid seeds require an 800 meter buffer zone to prevent pollen spread.... So cross-contamination is not only possible, it is likely. So if , as has been documented, his neighbors were growing RR canola in 1996, it is very possible that seeds saved from that crop will be contaminated with Monsantos patented gene.
The more I read into this, the more it stinks to high heaven. Schmeiser claims, and has independent lab tests to prove, that there was nowhere near '98%' RR canola growing in his fields. That is what Monsanto said.

Your problem is that you are finding different excuses than he did. He was there and he claimed that his seed field was contaminated in a certain way. Saying that it was not his way then says that he is not telling the truth. How something may be cross-pollinated has no bearing on what he claimed. Making up another story now contradicts his claims. Consider that every convicted murderer who ever went to trial testified that he or she was innocent just as Percy Schmeiser did. Courts found them all guilty and it's over when the gavel falls.

Martin

See why it is considered a myth by so many? So many people come up with possible scenarios while neglecting what used as the defense. His neighbors fields were not closer than the 75' mentioned in the first quote. 800 meters would apply to plants which are pollinated by wind. Although canola may be pollinated by bees, and the bees do make honey from it, most beekeepers don't want it.

Brassica family is very interesting in how varied it is. If there were a book covering all of the different ones and how they reproduce, opening to any section would find a different answer. Some are self-incompatible, some are self-fertile, and some must have insect pollination. One size not fit all when it comes to that family. B. napus does not need any outside help to produce viable seeds. All it needs is one single flower to make a multiple seed pod. That certain little group is about as varied as the whole family in that it includes rutabagas, Siberian kale, and rape.

Martin

Yeah, the brassicas are a varied group... yet Monsanto seems to have no problem infesting the gene pool from now to eternity with a bacterium gene, patented by a private corporation.

Notice that Monsanto never really cared HOW the gene got onto Schmeisers land, they investigated, and found NO evidence he ever purchased seed. I doubt Monsanto really wants to dig into that aspect of things, as it would expose the fact that they have ZERO control over this technology that is now self-replicating and spread far and wide throughout the gene pool.

Canola is a stabilized hybrid of rapeseed. No natural gene pool was affected. Also, no bacterium was involved. That would apply to BT, not RR.

Martin

The scientists say otherwise...

http://www.psrast.org/subeqau.htm

Canola is not soybeans.

__________________
The internet - fueling paranoia and misinformation since 1873.

A few more spliced genes it will be

True, but the process for modifying the DNA is essentially the same.