EverCrest Message Forums
You are not logged in. Login or Register.
Author
Topic: Norman Borlaug is dead
Karnaj
Road Warrior Queef
posted 09-14-2009 09:13:19 AM
Why there aren't monuments the size of Mount Rushmore for this man, I'll never know.
That's the American Dream: to make your life into something you can sell. - Chuck Palahniuk, Haunted

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith



Beer.

Timpofee
Mancake
posted 09-14-2009 09:39:34 AM
This was the topic of a conversation we had when I found out.
I overheard someone say "Man.. who other than Michael Jackson can claim to have had such a enormous impact on the whole world" to his inbred girlfriend..
So brought up this guy..
yeah.. he didnt understand.. so i told him to "Beat it"
Maradon!
posted 09-14-2009 06:27:25 PM
The guy had some serious detractors among various environmentalist groups, Earth First and Greenpeace and so forth. Saving a billion lives is not everybody's idea of a good deed, even less so if you empower those lives to rise out of a "charming" state of subsistence farming.

Maradon! fucked around with this message on 09-14-2009 at 06:27 PM.

Greenlit
posted 09-14-2009 06:32:10 PM
quote:
A sleep deprived Karnaj stammered:
Why there aren't monuments the size of Mount Rushmore for this man, I'll never know.

I was thinking that just his hand should be added to the top of Rushmore, as though he were leaning on Washington, Jefferson, Roosevelt and Lincoln.

Talonus
Loner
posted 09-14-2009 09:06:48 PM
quote:
Maradon! got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
The guy had some serious detractors among various environmentalist groups, Earth First and Greenpeace and so forth. Saving a billion lives is not everybody's idea of a good deed, even less so if you empower those lives to rise out of a "charming" state of subsistence farming.

Norman Borlaug was a good man working with the best of motives. He deserves far more respect than he'll ever get for what he did for humanity.

That said, there are legitimate issues with the Green Revolution that Borlaug did not, and really should not, have expected. Its hard to gauge the impact of this as well; decrying the Green Revolution to any extent crosses into unpopular territory, even when the complaints are valid. I'd say that corporations, such as Monsanto, are far more to blame for this than Borlaug though.

Maradon!
posted 09-14-2009 09:26:53 PM
Which concerns are those? I've only ever heard things rooted in hybridization paranoia or general anthopophobia, neither of which I consider to be real problems.
Talonus
Loner
posted 09-14-2009 10:00:22 PM
Problems related to a population boom probably have gotten the most press I believe. The negative effects of monoculture, maximizing short term crop gains over proper land quality/maintenance, the heavy chemical and resources (water/topsoil) required, etc. are nothing to sneeze at though. I only have passing knowledge of the topic though, so I don't know enough to speak of it in detail.

Borlaug was presented with a specific problem and the Green Revolution quite effectively. We now have a new problem that comes as a result of the speed, scale, and complacency of the Green Revolution as one solution to the issue. This has resulted in the long term effects that haven't been studied as much as they should have because... hey it did a lot to solve hunger right?

Maradon!
posted 09-14-2009 10:42:40 PM
Depopulationists like to ignore expanding agricultural capacity. It's really kinda ironic, they impugn people like Borlaug for helping millions survive and creating a population boom, when the very fact that agricultural output is able to grow so much in so many areas means their overpopulation fears were unfounded in the first place.

It all just sounds like veiled disgust at modernity itself; misanthropic zealots aghast that Borlaug would DARE manipulate the sacrosanct earth for mere human benefit. Monoculture? Like all farming, everywhere? Is it better for people to die due to a lack of speciation or due to regular starvation?

Isn't worrying about biodiversity something you do a few steps further up Maslow's pyramid?

Blindy.
Suicide (Also: Gay.)
posted 09-15-2009 07:33:12 AM
Hey guys we've adapted to everything so far but we can't adapt to these new problems lolol

edit: my proof is that the answer is not immediately obvious to an untrained person.

Blindy. fucked around with this message on 09-15-2009 at 07:33 AM.

Mr. Parcelan
posted 09-15-2009 07:57:00 AM
what if we kill everyone who doesn't agree with me
Karnaj
Road Warrior Queef
posted 09-15-2009 09:47:23 AM
quote:
Aw, geez, I have Maradon! all over myself!
Which concerns are those? I've only ever heard things rooted in hybridization paranoia or general anthopophobia, neither of which I consider to be real problems.

Borlaug himself stated a few years ago that the main problem facing the world as food supply goes is lack of unused farmland. There are only few regions in the world remaining which can be exploited for farmland. After that, the only choice we will have is increase yields of existing farmland, cut down vast swaths of forest for new farmland, or reclaim old farmland by destroying existing suburbs and exurbs.

Or, of course, decrease our population, but people electing not to reproduce is just silly.

That's the American Dream: to make your life into something you can sell. - Chuck Palahniuk, Haunted

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith



Beer.

Karnaj
Road Warrior Queef
posted 09-15-2009 10:37:10 AM
Borlaug on Penn and Teller's Bullshit.
That's the American Dream: to make your life into something you can sell. - Chuck Palahniuk, Haunted

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. - John Kenneth Galbraith



Beer.

Greenlit
posted 09-15-2009 08:33:23 PM
quote:
Karnaj probably says this to all the girls:
reclaim old farmland by destroying existing suburbs and exurbs.

I fully support this.

All times are US/Eastern
Hop To: