Savior Gates

[ecco]

I don’t favor people starving , but neither like Gate’s solutions. The big ag and chemical methods are destroying the environment and in the long run will bring about catastrophic consequences to the biodiversity of sustainable crops and the food supply, ultimately killing more people through starvation.

You are obviously unaware of the damage being done to the Amazon rainforest by thousands of small subsistence farmers cutting down trees to plant small farms.

You are obviously unaware of the ongoing starvation across Africa because small farms are so perilous.

Why do you think that large farms are not practicing biodiversity?

If you read about the plagues in Revelation it’s so obvious that humans bring these upon themselves, especially by someone like Gates playing god.

If you really want to talk about plagues in the times of the Bible then you should be aware that that is exactly the problem caused by small family farms. The dust bowl in this country was partly caused by small farmers not rotating crops and varying planting patterns.

How many large farms have caused plagues?

Why are you are just against science and progress?

 

[InChrist]

You are obviously unaware of the damage being done to the Amazon rainforest by thousands of small subsistence farmers cutting down trees to plant small farms.

You are obviously unaware of the ongoing starvation across Africa because small farms are so perilous.

Why do you think that large farms are not practicing biodiversity?




If you really want to talk about plagues in the times of the Bible then you should be aware that that is exactly the problem caused by small family farms. The dust bowl in this country was partly caused by small farmers not rotating crops and varying planting patterns.

How many large farms have caused plagues?

Why are you are just against science and progress?

I am not against science or progress. I suppose it depends on what is called “progress”. I don’t think poisoning and sterilizing the soil is smart science or good progress. Nor, that getting farmers dependent on GMO seeds and limiting varieties is wise or safe
The dust bowl or Amazon jungle situations you refer to have occurred specifically because farmers were NOT implementing biodiversity or regenerative, sustainable farming practices. But that is changing and can be changed through organic, sustainable farming. There are several fair trade coffee companies and others now doing just that with the farmers they work with.

This is an incredible account of Allan Savory and his work of rejuvenating deserts.
Cows are Turning Desert Back Into Grassland by Grazing Like Bison

Homepage




Other interesting links:
What is Sustainable Farming and why it is important for our wellbeing | OnePlate


“Sustainable” Agriculture: often debated, rarely understood

 

[ecco]

The dust bowl or Amazon jungle situations you refer to have occurred specifically because farmers were NOT implementing biodiversity or regenerative, sustainable farming practices.

For tens of thousands of years, they haven't implemented biodiversity or regenerative, sustainable farming practices. Why do you think some of them know about those things now? It's because of scientific research and people going out and teaching.

But that is changing and can be changed through organic, sustainable farming. There are several fair trade coffee companies and others now doing just that with the farmers they work with.

A few. But that is not what is happening in most places like South America and Africa.

This article...
Deforestation in the Amazon
...gives a pretty good summary. If you read it and understand it, you will see it is not people like Gates who are causing the problems.

 

[ecco]

This is an incredible account of Allan Savory and his work of rejuvenating deserts.
Cows are Turning Desert Back Into Grassland by Grazing Like Bison

From your link...

The combination of desertification, an exponentially growing human population and climate change leave humanity facing a perfect storm of apocalyptic proportions.

The Savory Institute is in the process of restoring nearly 40 million acres of grassland on 5 continents, by doing just that.​

Did you know that one of the contributors to The Savory Institute is The Nature Conservancy?

Microsoft

When We Protect Nature, Nature Protects Us
Even through uncertain times, Earth Day provides us a chance to celebrate our planet and reflect on what nature and the outdoors mean to us. The Nature Conservancy teamed up with Microsoft for Earth Day 2020 to ensure our natural world is protected for many years to come.

Microsoft helped in several ways:
​

• 
  
  • Microsoft donated $150,000 to the Conservancy to support TNC's mission to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends.
  • Working together with SilviaTerra, Microsoft and TNC are helping to protect the health of our forests. Find your forest at Microsoft’s FOCUS/Forests Project. Microsoft is also sharing personal stories of people who have devoted their professional lives to protecting nature.

Now you do. But you could have found that out all by yourself.

 

[InChrist]

For tens of thousands of years, they haven't implemented biodiversity or regenerative, sustainable farming practices. Why do you think some of them know about those things now? It's because of scientific research and people going out and teaching.




A few. But that is not what is happening in most places like South America and Africa.

This article...
Deforestation in the Amazon
...gives a pretty good summary. If you read it and understand it, you will see it is not people like Gates who are causing the problems.

Thanks for the linked article you included. It was very interesting. I think it supports my perspective, as it indicates the major deforestation of the Amazon exponentially took off due to industrialization and modern agricultural practices.
I think your view may be off concerning the impact that traditional farmers had on the forests. It wasn’t until modern methods, the new farming techniques supposedly supported by “science “ were implemented that the problem of deforestation began.


“For the most part, farming in the Amazon has gotten a bad reputation for destroying rainforest land and habitats and leading to its commercialization; however, agricultural practices have existed in the rainforest for thousands of years without causing any disruptions to the local ecosystems, and the agricultural conflicts are really only a recent phenomenon.”

“Native communities in the Amazon have a longstanding history as farmers and have been able to successfully continue their practices without disturbing the forest.
They’ve done this by taking advantage of a traditional and sustainable form of farming known as shifting

Modern agricultural practices first involve slashing and burning hundreds of acres of rainforest. This technique, however, is used to quickly clear the land and also brings the majority of the soil’s nutrients to the surface, facilitating a period of rapid growth potential for several years.”

Sustainable Farming In The Amazon Rainforest | Responsible Tourism

Gates accelerates the problem because the corporate agribusiness methods he funds and promotes are those which destroy the environment, soil, small farmers and work against nature rather than with the natural ecosystem.

• “The Gates Foundation agricultural agenda supports agrochemicals, patented seeds and corporate control — interests that undermine regenerative, sustainable, small-scale farming.”

Why Bill Gates is accelerating a toxic food system


“By looking to the outcomes of AGRA we can start to see a repeating pattern with all these strategic alliances in the launching of Ag One. Through the Gates Foundation’s promotion of chemical and genetically modified inputs, they have worked to open up previously isolated or hard to reach markets in Africa, South Asia and Latin America for the benefit of private corporations, as these patented agricultural technologies and investments are very clearly made to derive profits. The commercialization mentioned by Voorhies means, in effect, private company profit.”

Gates Ag One: The Recolonisation Of Agriculture - Independent Science News | Food, Health and Agriculture Bioscience News

 

[InChrist]

From your link...

The combination of desertification, an exponentially growing human population and climate change leave humanity facing a perfect storm of apocalyptic proportions.

The Savory Institute is in the process of restoring nearly 40 million acres of grassland on 5 continents, by doing just that.​

Did you know that one of the contributors to The Savory Institute is The Nature Conservancy?

Microsoft

When We Protect Nature, Nature Protects Us
Even through uncertain times, Earth Day provides us a chance to celebrate our planet and reflect on what nature and the outdoors mean to us. The Nature Conservancy teamed up with Microsoft for Earth Day 2020 to ensure our natural world is protected for many years to come.

Microsoft helped in several ways:
​

• 
  
  • Microsoft donated $150,000 to the Conservancy to support TNC's mission to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends.
  • Working together with SilviaTerra, Microsoft and TNC are helping to protect the health of our forests. Find your forest at Microsoft’s FOCUS/Forests Project. Microsoft is also sharing personal stories of people who have devoted their professional lives to protecting nature.

Now you do. But you could have found that out all by yourself.

That’s great the Savory Institute received some funding from The Nature Conservatory and Microsoft provided funds to the Conservatory.

But I see a real problem when groups that are supposed to be saving the environment have such financial ties and are under so much influence from corporations that may have ulterior motives or exploit the earth’s
resources and people for profit.

‘The system was broken’: How The Nature Conservancy prospered but ran aground

 

[ecco]

But I see a real problem when groups that are supposed to be saving the environment have such financial ties and are under so much influence from corporations that may have ulterior motives or exploit the earth’s
resources and people for profit.

‘The system was broken’: How The Nature Conservancy prospered but ran aground

"that may have ulterior motives"? You knock Gates but you haven't shown that he has done anything wrong. You cite an article about the "broken" Nature Conservancy. That article makes no mention of corporate influence or exploitation of resources. Rather it talks about internal management problems. You need to stop looking at just headlines and actually read the articles you refer to.

 

[InChrist]

"that may have ulterior motives"? You knock Gates but you haven't shown that he has done anything wrong. You cite an article about the "broken" Nature Conservancy. That article makes no mention of corporate influence or exploitation of resources. Rather it talks about internal management problems. You need to stop looking at just headlines and actually read the articles you refer to.

I read the article in its entirety . I realize the one about the Nature Conservatory went into much detail concerning their internal struggles. Nevertheless, I linked it to highlight the way corporate entities use various nonprofit or environmental groups to make themselves look good and/or exert influence with their funding.

Anyway, I gave you post #45, with two links, and tried to explain that Gates’ money and agenda supports big corporate agribusiness, agrochemicals, patented seeds and corporate control ( bad for the environment), which undermines regenerative, sustainable, small-scale farming (beneficial for the environment), farmers and their communities.

 

[ecco]

I read the article in its entirety . I realize the one about the Nature Conservatory went into much detail concerning their internal struggles. Nevertheless, I linked it to highlight the way corporate entities use various nonprofit or environmental groups to make themselves look good and/or exert influence with their funding.

Since you read the article in its entirety, you should've able to quote some passages that support your contention that "corporate entities use various nonprofit or environmental groups to make themselves look good and/or exert influence with their funding. You might also explain what you mean by "exert influence". It is one thing if they expect the money contributed should help their bottom line. It is another if they want to influence say, the type of research done or the geographical area to receive support. I hope you see the difference.

 

[ecco]

Anyway, I gave you post #45,

Regarding your post #45...

It is clear that "Independent Science News"...
About Independent Science News - Independent Science News | Food, Health and Agriculture Bioscience News,
...is pretty much anti-science.

Here is one paragraph from their about page...

These interests have sought to manufacture a public consensus that genes (and not junk food, pesticides or poor public policies) are chiefly to blame for ill heath, inequality and social dysfunction.​

That statement is pretty nonsensical. The only support they offer for it is a reference to the tobacco industry with a link that doesn't work. I can not remember any organization blaming genetics over junk food, pesticides, or poor public policies. That is nothing more than a strawman they chose to erect.

Here is another example of their rather deceitful comments...

Examples of science journalists exposing deceit and manipulation are rare. They are rare mostly (though not entirely) because science reporters, even at Science magazine and the New York Times, see themselves less as investigative journalists and more as explainers of science. Such journalists typically lack the independence, the public interest focus, and often the expertise, to contextualise scientific results and penetrate the inner logic of institutional agendas.
​

There are several problems with that comment.

It is not generally the job of science reporters, even at Science magazine and the New York Times, to expose anything. It is their job to make highly technical scientific knowledge comprehensible to the general public.

It is the job of scientists themselves to expose deceit and manipulation. They do this.

• Perhaps you know about the "Cold Fusion" incident.
• Perhaps you know that the vast majority of scientists challenged the tobacco industry hacks.
• Perhaps you remember Andrew Wakefield telling people how vaccines cause autism. Perhaps you know that the journal Lancet published his "findings". Do you also know that his fraudulent claims were quickly uncovered and exposed by other scientists? Do you know that the British Medical Journal published the facts of his fraud? Do you know that Lancet published a retraction?

If you get your information from just very biased sources, then your views will always be very biased. If you don't apply critical thinking to what you read, then your views will always be biased.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

If he really wanted to do something useful, he ought to give money to the scientists working for a solution to climate change.

Euh.... he does. Billions.


For example, he had a team of physicists and engineers design a new generation of nuclear power plants, which is supposed to replace all current ones. Most of the current ones were designed in the 60s and 70s. With a pencil and a ruler.

The new design is also not wasteful. In fact, they can run on the nuclear waste of the old designs.

Back in 2015, he pretty much had a deal with china to build prototypes of these factories in China, as some sort of test case. And then Trump came to power and started a virtual war with China, after which the deal had to be stopped. And instead of building these power plants in the US, Trump preferred to double down on fossil fuels and even rebooted coal industries....

Guys like Gates and Musk are tech visionaries with the money and the brains to come up with very creative solutions to some of the world's biggest problems. But even with all their money and expertise, they can't do anything to turn things around without governments playing ball.


I always like to compare it to asbestos. Back in the day, this was a common material used in construction. Very common. Then it was discovered what its negative impact was on environment and health. Same with the cfk gasses which were found to damage the ozone layer.

The result was that, practically overnight, these things were simply outlawed. From one day to the next, I could no longer build a house that has asbestos in the roofing.
I could no longer buy a spray can that contained such gasses.


Why is it, that I can still buy fossil fuel cars?
Why is it, that cars under development right now and which won't even come out in the next 2 years, are still running on fossil fuels?

Would it hurt economically at first? Sure. But at the same time, it would open up IMMENSE economic opportunities. Big oil companies could shift their focus from oil to things like solar power, battery technology, hydrogen fuel, etc.

They won't do that as long as the billions and trillions keep rolling in due to being completely free in trading oil. But watch how fast they will manage to switch tracks once government tells them "the end".

IMO, not enough people are going to change how they act to affect climate change.

Having said the above, I think it is simply not realistic to "rely" on citizens of the world to "change their behavior" well enough as to turn climate change around.

As said, as long as fossil fuel cars are being sold and as long as they remain 2x, even 3x, as cheap as electric cars - people are going to keep buying fossil fuel cars.

People also aren't going to drive less. It is not realistic to expect citizens to cut their driving by 50% to 70%. It simply is not going to happen.

The human behavior that affects climate change is the total output of human society. And the root cause of it is the technology used. What you need to do is actually tackle the problem of "dirty technology" and replace it with "clean technology".

In this day and age, I shouldn't be able to buy a fossil fuel car. Just like I'm no longer able / allowed to use asbestos in the roofing of my house.

Instead of trying to convince me to stop driving.... just give me a cleaner car!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

but he acts like he thinks can control and manipulate things in the world with his money

Which he can do, obviously.

The same goes for all folk that are this ridiculously rich.

Suppose you want a visit to the white house to have a discussion with Biden on some subject or another.
When do you think you will most likely succeed in "inviting yourself" there?

If you have 1 million in the bank, or if you have 100 billion in the bank?

Money is power in this world.

 

[ecco]

For example, he had a team of physicists and engineers design a new generation of nuclear power plants, which is supposed to replace all current ones.


Instead of trying to convince me to stop driving.... just give me a cleaner car!

Good post.

 

[InChrist]

If you get your information from just very biased sources, then your views will always be very biased. If you don't apply critical thinking to what you read, then your views will always be biased.

I think that if you trust any source to be unbiased then there’s a problem, since all are prone to biases. Even scientists, whether it be personal, political or due to pressure from whoever is funding a project. No person or source is completely neutral. So seeking the truth and most accurate information is the goal, I think.

There’s enough evidence available to show that Gates is not truly out for the interest of others...



“The investigation concludes that the number of Africans suffering extreme hunger has increased by 30 percent in the 18 countries that Gates targeted. Rural poverty has metastasized dramatically …

Under Gates’ plantation system, Africa’s rural populations have become slaves on their own land to a tyrannical serfdom of high-tech inputs, mechanization, rigid schedules, burdensome conditionalities, credits and subsidies … The only entities benefiting from Gates’ program are his international corporate partners.”


Could Gates' Farmland Impact the Environment and Food Supply?

 

[Kooky]

For tens of thousands of years, they haven't implemented biodiversity or regenerative, sustainable farming practices. Why do you think some of them know about those things now? It's because of scientific research and people going out and teaching.

The "small" farmers you are talking about are typically landowners who run farming businesses with employees, hoping to sell to local markets and international agribusinesses, or ranchers who need new land for the large herds they maintain for the meat processing industry.

The idea that these are substantially the same as pre-industrial subsistence level farmers is dubious at best and misleading at worst. Farmers in pre-industrial times were not idiots who destroyed the land that sustained them because they knew nothing of farming (when it did happen, it would be typically colonists and recent settlers who were not yet used to the conditions of the new lands they had settled into).

What is rather the case is that, in order to produce for a capitalist industrial economy, a lot of earlier knowledge that kept farming sustainable was thrown out of the window because producing large volumes quickly became more important, and because new fertilizer technology would help sustain or surpass earlier production levels anyway, thus minimizing the obvious impact of soil erosion for a while.

What actually happened with these new industrial methods was e.g. the Dust Bowl, a massive near-cataclysmic case of soil erosion due to excessive and destructive farming and ranching at an industrial scale for the sake of a capitalist economy that demanded such practices.


What this all means is that a lot of earlier knowledge on how to run smaller scale, more sustainable agricultural operations - knowledge that was often not scientifically codified and only tradited orally, or was simply considered obsolote, or was held by non-Westerners and therefore seen as intrinsically of lesser value than superior Western industrial knowledge - has been lost, or is being held in such little regard that it is effectively dead, and has only in recent years been recovered.

Scientists, these days, are in the process of re-discovering methods of building and farming that people in pre-industrial societies of the Third World had been using for centuries - because these methods were useful in the context of the environment they lived in!