Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: MoJo: What Did Monsanto Show Bill Nye to Make Him Fall "in Love" With GMOs? [View all]ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)45. The Green Revolution was 40s-60s, which is what you're referring to. Borlaug didnt do
Last edited Thu Mar 12, 2015, 12:11 AM - Edit history (1)
GMOs. He did conventional breeding, irradiation, etc. GM is direct modification of the genome. Conventional breeding, etc are indirect.
Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification, is the direct manipulation of an organism's genome using biotechnology. New DNA may be inserted in the host genome by first isolating and copying the genetic material of interest using molecular cloning methods to generate a DNA sequence, or by synthesizing the DNA, and then inserting this construct into the host organism. Genes may be removed, or "knocked out", using a nuclease. Gene targeting is a different technique that uses homologous recombination to change an endogenous gene, and can be used to delete a gene, remove exons, add a gene, or introduce point mutations.
An organism that is generated through genetic engineering is considered to be a genetically modified organism (GMO). The first GMOs were bacteria in 1973 and GM mice were generated in 1974. Insulin-producing bacteria were commercialized in 1982 and genetically modified food has been sold since 1994.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering
An organism that is generated through genetic engineering is considered to be a genetically modified organism (GMO). The first GMOs were bacteria in 1973 and GM mice were generated in 1974. Insulin-producing bacteria were commercialized in 1982 and genetically modified food has been sold since 1994.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_engineering
The Green Revolution spread technologies that already existed, but had not been widely implemented outside industrialized nations. These technologies included modern irrigation projects, pesticides, synthetic nitrogen fertilizer and improved crop varieties developed through the conventional, science-based methods available at the time.
The novel technological development of the Green Revolution was the production of novel wheat cultivars. Agronomists bred cultivars of maize, wheat, and rice that are generally referred to as HYVs or "high-yielding varieties". HYVs have higher nitrogen-absorbing potential than other varieties. Since cereals that absorbed extra nitrogen would typically lodge, or fall over before harvest, semi-dwarfing genes were bred into their genomes. A Japanese dwarf wheat cultivar (Norin 10 wheat), which was sent to Washington, D.C. by Cecil Salmon, was instrumental in developing Green Revolution wheat cultivars...
With advances in molecular genetics, the mutant genes responsible for Arabidopsis thaliana genes (GA 20-oxidase,[18] ga1,[19] ga1-3[20]), wheat reduced-height genes (Rht)[21] and a rice semidwarf gene (sd1)[22] were cloned. These were identified as gibberellin biosynthesis genes or cellular signaling component genes. Stem growth in the mutant background is significantly reduced leading to the dwarf phenotype. Photosynthetic investment in the stem is reduced dramatically as the shorter plants are inherently more stable mechanically. Assimilates become redirected to grain production, amplifying in particular the effect of chemical fertilizers on commercial yield.
HYVs significantly outperform traditional varieties in the presence of adequate irrigation, pesticides, and fertilizers. In the absence of these inputs, traditional varieties may outperform HYVs. Therefore, several authors have challenged the apparent superiority of HYVs not only compared to the traditional varieties alone, but by contrasting the monocultural system associated with HYVs with the polycultural system associated with traditional ones.[23]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution#Technologies
The novel technological development of the Green Revolution was the production of novel wheat cultivars. Agronomists bred cultivars of maize, wheat, and rice that are generally referred to as HYVs or "high-yielding varieties". HYVs have higher nitrogen-absorbing potential than other varieties. Since cereals that absorbed extra nitrogen would typically lodge, or fall over before harvest, semi-dwarfing genes were bred into their genomes. A Japanese dwarf wheat cultivar (Norin 10 wheat), which was sent to Washington, D.C. by Cecil Salmon, was instrumental in developing Green Revolution wheat cultivars...
With advances in molecular genetics, the mutant genes responsible for Arabidopsis thaliana genes (GA 20-oxidase,[18] ga1,[19] ga1-3[20]), wheat reduced-height genes (Rht)[21] and a rice semidwarf gene (sd1)[22] were cloned. These were identified as gibberellin biosynthesis genes or cellular signaling component genes. Stem growth in the mutant background is significantly reduced leading to the dwarf phenotype. Photosynthetic investment in the stem is reduced dramatically as the shorter plants are inherently more stable mechanically. Assimilates become redirected to grain production, amplifying in particular the effect of chemical fertilizers on commercial yield.
HYVs significantly outperform traditional varieties in the presence of adequate irrigation, pesticides, and fertilizers. In the absence of these inputs, traditional varieties may outperform HYVs. Therefore, several authors have challenged the apparent superiority of HYVs not only compared to the traditional varieties alone, but by contrasting the monocultural system associated with HYVs with the polycultural system associated with traditional ones.[23]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution#Technologies
Norman Ernest Borlaug (March 25, 1914 September 12, 2009)[2] was an American biologist, humanitarian and Nobel laureate who has been called "the father of the Green Revolution...
Borlaug received his B.Sc. Biology 1937 and Ph.D. in plant pathology and genetics from the University of Minnesota in 1942. He took up an agricultural research position in Mexico, where he developed semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties.
During the mid-20th century, Borlaug led the introduction of these high-yielding varieties combined with modern agricultural production techniques to Mexico, Pakistan, and India. As a result, Mexico became a net exporter of wheat by 1963. Between 1965 and 1970, wheat yields nearly doubled in Pakistan and India, greatly improving the food security in those nations.[9] These collective increases in yield have been labeled the Green Revolution...He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 in recognition of his contributions to world peace through increasing food supply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
Borlaug received his B.Sc. Biology 1937 and Ph.D. in plant pathology and genetics from the University of Minnesota in 1942. He took up an agricultural research position in Mexico, where he developed semi-dwarf, high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties.
During the mid-20th century, Borlaug led the introduction of these high-yielding varieties combined with modern agricultural production techniques to Mexico, Pakistan, and India. As a result, Mexico became a net exporter of wheat by 1963. Between 1965 and 1970, wheat yields nearly doubled in Pakistan and India, greatly improving the food security in those nations.[9] These collective increases in yield have been labeled the Green Revolution...He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 in recognition of his contributions to world peace through increasing food supply.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
IOW, Borlaug did his most significant work before there was such a thing as a GMO; he was 59 by the time the first genetically modified organism (a bacteria) was created in 1973.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
124 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
MoJo: What Did Monsanto Show Bill Nye to Make Him Fall "in Love" With GMOs? [View all]
99th_Monkey
Mar 2015
OP
really? i think he's gone over to the dark side. too bad. i used to like him on seattle tv.
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#2
not quite "dark side," don't worry!--but he's a hydraulic engineer and impresario,
MisterP
Mar 2015
#4
Ah, I see. He's got a BA in mechanical engineering. The "science guy" is an engineer. And
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#37
And I have an MS in a science (more closely related to this topic than nye's) and
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#123
"which have been linked pretty decisively to the decline of monarch butterflies"
Major Nikon
Mar 2015
#3
It's easier to rant and rave than realize that farmers are trying to grow as much food as possible.
HuckleB
Mar 2015
#5
Oh baloney. The US pays farmers *not* to grow food to keep prices up, and the only reason
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#38
You don't want to discuss with me because you can't refute the truth. All you have are canned
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#78
To get a sense why the monarch butterflies are in decline, I called Lincoln Brower, a professor of
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#9
The alternative to what? The scientist says that Roundup is the primary cause of Monarch
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#13
Is that 'simple"? You seem to be saying that without GM & Roundup, something *worse* for
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#17
first i want to make sure that that is indeed you argument. as for your pirate chart, it's
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#22
so you're not even going to tell me if that is indeed what your claim is, that if there weren't
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#31
No more misleading than your claim that corn production has 'skyrocketed,' especially
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#41
"Increased" doesn't = "Skyrocketed". And if it increased because a big corporation lobbied
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#46
Well, I'd say you'd get an argument if you claim GM crops have "greatly increased food production".
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#36
The Green Revolution was 40s-60s, which is what you're referring to. Borlaug didnt do
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#45
Hardly "destroyed". It said the only variety of GM that would cause a problem is one being phased
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#10
I don't think you understand the meaning of ad hominem. And I only looked at the first two
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#35
Why did I bother to bring *what* up? Pointing out that some scientists have interests that
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#42
Do you also share a BS in Mechanical Engineering? That's the sum total of his science experience.
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#47
Certainly. But it's not a degree that gives Nye any relevant qualification to judge the
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#50
Certainly a BS in Engineering gives him the right to an opinion, and a general knowledge of
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#61
I also have a science degree: at a higher level, and more relevant than nye's. i've done
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#64
You keep making this claim, but you keep showing that you don't understand the issue at all.
HuckleB
Mar 2015
#68
If you want to use Koch & Monsanto-linked sources, be prepared to be called on it.
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#98
"Do you also share a BS in Mechanical Engineering? That's the sum total of his science experience."
NCTraveler
Mar 2015
#106
Nye has a BS in Mechanical Engineering. He worked at Boeing after he graduated, before
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#48
This thread isn't about Vandana shiva, and you're the only one who brought her into it.
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#114
Not generally, because the label "organic" doesn't equate to healthier foods.
NuclearDem
Mar 2015
#107
Good for him, but I'm my own man and can make my own decisions based on the evidence.
NuclearDem
Mar 2015
#109
and him eating organic when organic is 'meaningless' doesn't bring his reliability
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#111
nye the scientist loves organics (which many of our resident DU scientists think =
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#115
it's only a fallacy if you claim his inconsistency proves his position must be wrong. which
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#118
Interestingly, my guess was that Nye was vegetarian or vegan, because he has 'the look'.
ND-Dem
Mar 2015
#55
Debate will continue until all results of putting these gene changes into the environment can be
mmonk
Mar 2015
#62
You have never advocated for "truth in labeling," just demonization via labeling.
HuckleB
Mar 2015
#70
What could account for such a change? That's some photo of employees with a faux Bill Bow Tie.
appalachiablue
Mar 2015
#76
Ha, ha. Not a big sucker, far from it. He seems like a person who knows just what he's doing.
appalachiablue
Mar 2015
#110