31–40 of 62 posts
IMHO this is a romantic effort, no one can plant a tree species at such a scale.
We routinely plant over a billion trees each year in the USA. Tree planting is a huge industry. We have tractor attachments that can mass plant some species.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes, I just have some view of a city, or whatever, look out, quietly scan the horizon and just muse "every tree I see was planted by someone". Someone said "here, there will be a tree" and it was so. Small ones, big ones. They're just everywhere. "See that park over there? Someone put every one of those trees in the ground." Then, as a corollary, one day, a parking lot has several dozen trees. Next day, they're…
Given adequate rainfall and the right range of soil acidity trees will seed and grow themselves. This town was farm fields in the 1930s. Some trees were planted when the streets were laid out and houses built. Others, particularly ornamentals, continue to be planted. But there are a great number of trees that are volunteers that have been allowed to mature over the last century. Norway maples, sweet gum, tulip poplar…
So this group wants to propagate a GMO to "save" a tree species? Which is of course impossible with current mechanisms. Although it seems that producing a near replacement tree is likely within reach. But they can't even seem to be sure what edited organism they are trying to propagate? This is why I do not trust GMO stuff. I have no special credentials (just an undergraduate degree) but even at that level it was cle…
how is GMO different from normal breeding where we hane no clue what mutations happen. Normal breeding doesn't even attempt toestudy for safety. Yes the science should have been better done but the worst case of GMO is the same as everything else.
The answer is in your question. We have no clue.
What we do not know about how living organisms recreate themselves is much more, and more important (IMO) than what we do know.
We know that DNA plays an important role. We also know that DNA is not the whole story.
We know very little about how DNA plays it role. We terribly confused with analogies to coding systems we know about, but it is clearly much more than a code.
The part of reproduction that does not involve DNA is almost a complete mystery.
In normal breeding we do not have to be concerned about what we do not know, when we start changing DNA it becomes very important
We are creating novel self replicating organisms, there is a lot that might go wrong. A very small chance of complete catastrophic results
But, money
So this group wants to propagate a GMO to "save" a tree species? Which is of course impossible with current mechanisms. Although it seems that producing a near replacement tree is likely within reach. But they can't even seem to be sure what edited organism they are trying to propagate? This is why I do not trust GMO stuff. I have no special credentials (just an undergraduate degree) but even at that level it was cle…
So this group wants to propagate a GMO to "save" a tree species? Which is of course impossible with current mechanisms. Although it seems that producing a near replacement tree is likely within reach. But they can't even seem to be sure what edited organism they are trying to propagate? This is why I do not trust GMO stuff. I have no special credentials (just an undergraduate degree) but even at that level it was cle…
We have no idea where the smallpox vaccine actually comes from, and it long predates GMO stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have no idea where the smallpox vaccine actually comes from, and it long predates GMO stuff.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
For decades everyone believed it was cowpox, another common virus, but after a while scientists noticed it wasn’t actually cowpox - and modern generic studies show that it doesn’t match any known virus
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
the original vaccine was a live virus, and the only way to grow more of it was to infect people and then harvest it from the pox on their bodies. So many generations of this vaccine virus were passed around this way. For decades everyone believed it was cowpox, another common virus, but after a while scientists noticed it wasn’t actually cowpox - and modern generic studies show that it doesn’t match any known virus
What you mentioned in the first paragraph is not vaccination, it is called variolation. It predates vaccination by a large margin and was far more dangerous.
So this group wants to propagate a GMO to "save" a tree species? Which is of course impossible with current mechanisms. Although it seems that producing a near replacement tree is likely within reach. But they can't even seem to be sure what edited organism they are trying to propagate? This is why I do not trust GMO stuff. I have no special credentials (just an undergraduate degree) but even at that level it was cle…
how is GMO different from normal breeding where we hane no clue what mutations happen. Normal breeding doesn't even attempt toestudy for safety. Yes the science should have been better done but the worst case of GMO is the same as everything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the original vaccine was a live virus, and the only way to grow more of it was to infect people and then harvest it from the pox on their bodies. So many generations of this vaccine virus were passed around this way. For decades everyone believed it was cowpox, another common virus, but after a while scientists noticed it wasn’t actually cowpox - and modern generic studies show that it doesn’t match any known virus
All of what you said goes against common knowledge of the history of the vaccine. You will have to provide solid sources for your claims in order to not appear as a conspiracy theory peddler. What you mentioned in the first paragraph is not vaccination, it is called variolation. It predates vaccination by a large margin and was far more dangerous.
What conspiracy? It’s a theory of lost knowledge / confusion, but no one is conspiring with anyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of what you said goes against common knowledge of the history of the vaccine. You will have to provide solid sources for your claims in order to not appear as a conspiracy theory peddler. What you mentioned in the first paragraph is not vaccination, it is called variolation. It predates vaccination by a large margin and was far more dangerous.
> a conspiracy theory peddler. What conspiracy? It’s a theory of lost knowledge / confusion, but no one is conspiring with anyone.