All I want is an environmentalist consumer org that doesn't fall for the organic hogwash

@DeWayfarer It's not the extremism that's the trouble; the status quo of destroying the earth is extreme. The problem is stupidity.

@BlueVeins sorry. As much as I am pro environment, I must disagree. This is about control.

And neither side is likely to give up control. That it is stupid what they are doing is just the result of the struggle. They don't care as long as their side is winning.

It sounds stupid yet this always happens when two sides want control. They become mindless fanatics were even the most none violent become violent. You saw it on Jan 6th on one side and you see it in violent blockades currently on the other. And it's not just those two groups either. It's as well driven by religious groups.

@DeWayfarer Organic food is about control?

@BlueVeins actually yes. Look at the push for veganism. I have seen them get into physical fights over their fanatical issues over eating meat. It doesn't matter that they could have just walked away and that would have been the end of it.

@DeWayfarer Okayyyyyy, those are kinda two separate issues. I don't agree with the strategy of physically fighting people, but the idea that it's OK to needlessly consume the flesh of sentient beings and contribute to global warming seems pretty extreme, isn't it?

@BlueVeins do you really want to go there?

Look at the history of what produce is being sold in grocery stores. It's all man made produce. And for thousands of years. Broccoli, cauliflower, brussel sprouts and more all come from the mustard seed plant . None of that is natural.

@DeWayfarer And? What's natural got to do with anything? Cholera's natural, I want fuck all to do with that.

@BlueVeins we effect the environment on all sides is what it has to do with it. It's not just one sided.

@DeWayfarer the difference is that genetically enhanced crops are not bad for the environment, at least from the standpoint of human societal health and stability.

@BlueVeins I have to disagree again. Because of the very same argument that what we eat as well effects our health as well as the health of both animals and plants that we eat and what the animals eat. You make a new type of plant that takes over from the natural source every animal in existence has to change its own habits. Corn is not natural now days yet every bird will eat corn. You're effecting the environment because those same animals need to eat as well.

@DeWayfarer So basically what you're arguing against is agriculture, itself.

@BlueVeins no I am arguing that change is natural. Because even on it's own without man interfering it still will change. Just not the way man wants it to change.

To say one side is right over the other is utter nonsense. There's no black and white to the picture. It's in multiple hues some of which we can not even see.

And since we can not see the color we remain ignorant.

@DeWayfarer mmmm no, objective reality does exist and the environment is a measurable thing.

@BlueVeins never said either thing.

In fact change is life, which is both.

The everything changes. As Nature abhors a vacuum so does change abhor a stasis.

The change in the environment (mathematically speaking dx/dt, a mathematical derivative) is extremely real.