(Natural News) Oh yes they did. There’s now a so-called “study” that’s been done which supposedly determined that organic farming creates a much bigger carbon footprint that torques up “global warming” more than ever. Yes, old faithful US News has regurgitated a chunk of claims published in the International Journal of Science, and somebody has to set the record straight.
If you read the entire review of the “study” and the study itself, you can feel the GMO community grasping for anything to save face, especially in the midst of a tsunami of Bayer/Monsanto lawsuits (of which people are winning huge payouts) regarding glyphosate poisoning from using Roundup. Folks, this is the same weed killer used on the inside and out (think genetic engineering here and “Roundup Ready”) of 90 percent of U.S. corn, soy, canola, cottonseed, beets, alfalfa, and the list goes on.
The whole insidious anti-organic industry needs a big PR win and fast, so they’re jumping on the “climate change” bandwagon and spewing infested lies about organic farming. It’s time to deconstruct the biggest ones and expose the fraudulent “news” updates.
DEBUNKED: The 3 “consensus” lies about organic farming that true science completely tears apart
#1. “Organic food is worse for the climate than non-organic food”
Big lie. First off, non-organic food usually means chemical-based fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides are doused on the farms by crop dusters and spread by tractor “boom” sprayers that spray millions of gallons of unsustainable, climate-destroying bug killer and weed killer over millions of acres. And that comes only after the scientists modify the crop seeds in a laboratory with the same chemical genes from the poisonous pesticides.
|Discover how to prevent and reverse heart disease (and other cardio related events) with this free ebook: Written by popular Natural News writer Vicki Batt, this book includes everything you need to know about preventing heart disease, reversing hypertension, and nurturing your cardiac health without medication. Learn More.|
Then the biotech shills spew some venom about more organic greenhouse gas emissions, but the Health Ranger has already completely debunked that myth about C02. Climate change alarmists are trying to trick us all about CO2 levels rising to “unprecedented, alarming levels across our planet,” but in reality, Earth’s CO2 is close to its lowest point ever recorded. Oops.
To flip the whole lie on its back and watch it squirm even more, just consider the scientific fact that CO2 is NOT a pollutant, but conversely, we’d all die of starvation when every ecosystem collapses without it. There’s your real “Green Deal” folks.
#2. “It takes more land to farm organic food than it does non-organic food”
Big lie. It’s actually the other way around. Ever heard of vertical indoor farming or “vertical greens?” Organic farming, for the most part, decreases its impact on the environment. A 40,000 square foot facility can easily compete with the same yield of a 400-acre farm. If you really want to learn about sustainability, nutritious food, and plans to “save the world’s food supply” using technology and innovation (and no pesticides), then read up about indoor, organic, hydroponic, dense vertical gardens.
So no, organic farming does not require more land and thus higher emissions. The Swedish research team can return to the lab and clean off those cob-webbed microscopes at Chalmers University and study something useful.
3. “Organic food is bad because you get less yield, since you can’t use fertilizer”
Big lie. It’s just the opposite. Organic fertilizer can be utilized to INCREASE crop yield for plants grown in rotation. Oh wait, the biotech goons forgot to even bring that up. How convenient for them. That’s why we must deconstruct. That’s been thoroughly covered on Natural News thanks to Janine Acero.
Turns out plants thrive in nutrient-rich soil, and nitrogen is an important component in growing plants. Who’d have thought? Research reveals natural nitrogen-rich fertilizers produce plenty of impressive results for their “competitive” crop yield. Take for instance utilizing alfalfa pellets, bat guano, blood meal, chicken manure, compost tea, horse manure, fish emulsion, etc.
Then, we ALL also know about superbugs invading GMO crops and ruining their yield, year in and year out. Let’s talk about that. The now “GM superbug corn rootworm” completely devastated the all-too-popular BT corn Monsanto planted. Reports indicate that genetically modified Bt corn, which is currently grown on millions of U.S. acres, is no longer a success. Simply put, farmers who grow the crop are having to throw everything in the chemical arsenal at it just to produce workable yields.
And then there’s biosludge – re-purposed mass human waste used en masse
Just what kind of fertilizer are the “big guys” (think Bayer, Monsanto, Dupont, Dow, Syngenta, Cargill) using on these big conventional farms and selling to customers at all the big name stores, anyway. Are they the true purveyors of climate change, whether it be global warming or “universal” cooling? Do you assume all that fertilizer for sale at the local home improvement stores contains various organic materials? You could have just bought biosludge – repurposed human waste in the form of biosolids. It’s a “dirty war” out there folks. Polluted food and medicine. Think about that for a minute. It really takes some research and reflection to let it all sink in.
The same companies that created the poisonous gas for the gas chambers in the Holocaust are the ones claiming they’ve got a smaller carbon footprint now. The same companies that spray some of the same toxins on conventional and GM crops that were used in Agent Orange defoliator and cancer-causer in Vietnam. Ever heard of the two-headed pesticide-spewing monster they call Bayer/Monsanto?
Tune into Pesticides.news for updates on Big Food and Biotech lying through their teeth so you’ll buy Frankenfood from dementia farms instead of healthy food from chemical-free agriculture that’s sustainable – for real. Look in to a positive future for food and fuel.
Sources for this article include: