NathanJ, did your school teacher brain wash you with all this rubbish?

I hope your father will take out an injunction requiring this teacher to stop filling the heads of innocent kids with this ridiculous crap.

Sorry Nathan, I meant to ask in my last post if Nhoj is in your class. I hope not for your sake, it would be annoying having to associate with such a dill

......Manufacturing and transporting these chemicals uses significant quantities of energy and produces greenhouse gases. Not surprisingly, studies have shown that chemical farming uses considerably more energy per unit of production than organic farms, which do not use these chemical inputs."

Nathan, farming is all about yields and, as organic yields are lower than non organic, one could also ague that if it takes more farmers and more machine hours to produce the same quantities of food, then more energy would be used and more /greenhouse gasses would be the result per ton of harvested/planted food stuffs.

The other issue with organic foods is that there is a larger percentage of rejected product in the paddock due to infestation, and of cause, as this increased amount of rejected food rotts in the paddock, it produces greenhouse gasses.

So I suggest your science theory has some holes. Of cause, if you can counter argue this, please do.

The other problem with reduced yields, is that we are facing a global food shortage, so reducing yields will only make this problem worse.

Is Mise, you have just solved the problem. Hunt/grow your own.

.......Unfortunately few of these people make it past 60. I guess that proves the fallacy of so called healthy living.

Hasbeen, be careful you don't distort this thread with facts!

Njoh, labeling laws are like locks, as they only apply to honest people. If you can't be guaranteed you are buying organic, substitution is very relevant to this topic.

Nathan, the only way to solve your problem is to grow your own, because as I have explained, if yields are lower, that means more energy to deliver the same quantities.

Nathan,

A recent independent study in the UK showed that there was virtually no nutritional difference between organically grown food and normally grown food.

The analogy of drinking the chemicals used to grow food is as stupid as drinking the liquid cow crap that organics use. Fertilizers contain the same nitrates, phosphates etc that natural fertilizers do without the potential pathogens that excrement carries. The pesticides and weed killers used are non persistent that degrade and wash off within days.

Organic farming produces low yields of expensive food, with little to no nutritional benefits. Organics are more a fashion statement than a life improvement.

Paul, with regards to climate change, you can't have a foot in both paddocks.

If climate change is real, it means conditions that are most favorable for growing food naturally, ORGANICALLY, are reduced, meaning artificial growing conditions are needed to grow the food, in other words, chemicals and modification ie, GM foods.

As I have pointed out to Nathan, if yields of crops are lower (as they are with Organics) then it stands to reason that it takes more energy to produce and deliver the same volumes of foods. In other words, adding to your climate change problem.

So considering these facts, organic foods either contribute to climate change, or, climate change is not effected by humane practices, such as growing foods.

Which one do you support?

Adam and Eve seemed to do okay in the Garden of Eden, with purely organic food. There is nothing in the bible which say's ..and on the third day God created DDT!" Unfortunately for us, in those times it was a very small population, two, and a dame big garden. Today it ass about, dame big population and a very small garden.
Even the most skeptical on here must admit there is a problem in the World regarding the population and nutrition. I am a Green, not a lemming, so I'm not going to charge headlong over a cliff on some philosophical whim in totally supporting organic food production. I simply believe such a move at the present time would result in an increase in hunger throughout the world, not a decrease. Those who want organic food, my son is one of them, so be it. An apple with a worm in it, and an apple sprayed with XXX to kill worm (sorry worm, but for the greater good you had to make the ultimate sacrifice) are both preferable to no apple at all. When I discuss organics with my son he always uses the key words "I can afford to eat organic food." exactly can afford, unfortunate millions of others in the world can't.

"The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that nearly 870 million people of the 7.1 billion people in the world, or one in eight, were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2010-2012. Almost all the hungry people, 852 million, live in developing countries, representing 15 percent of the population of developing counties. There are 16 million people undernourished in developed countries."

Worth a read;

http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.ht

We can argue about the causes and affects until the cows come home, (Unfortunately for many, the cows simply never come home.)