4 ms·

The organic farming regulations are professionally developed for decades, globally. US labeling options and regulations are officially defined [1,2] Very small

The organic farming regulations are professionally developed for decades, globally. US labeling options and regulations are officially defined [1,2] Very small scale producers like the farmer in this thread have some leeway - this is a feature of your national regulatory framework suiting small local markets, it is relevant to a tiny fraction of traded organic produce. > Who decides which pesticides are okay, what is the criterion that everyone can agree on? You know in this age of IT you can find answers to your questions. [3] > Why are there differences across countries, if there is a proper definition of it? Because it is a developed practical system, its not defined by dictionary definition - it is very complicated. Why are there differences across countries in safety regulations? How well is the term "safety" internationally defined ? Where did you get the idea that dictionary definition of "organic farming" should be able to completely explain the practice. What other well defined terms do that ?? Renewables, Genetic Engineering, Nuclear, Carbon reduction? I think this involves unwillingness to observe context and make sense of terms, for the sake of the sort of argument which is fun for supporting sport teams. [1] https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/labeling https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/organic/labeling [2] https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=9874504b6f1025eb0e6b67cadf9d3b40&rgn=div6&view=text&node=7:3.1.1.9.32.7 https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?c=ecfr&SID=9874504b6f1... [3] https://www.ifoam.bio/en/about-us https://www.ifoam.bio/en/about-us

zeroname 8y ago
> Because it is a developed practical system, its not defined by dictionary definition - it is very complicated. It's a bunch of semi-religious practices that were made up on the spot with no scientific basis whatsoever. For you to put it next to Genetic Engineering or Renewables is quite misleading.
- strainer 8y ago
  How long did you take looking at the references I provided, to answer the questions you asked me ?
  - zeroname 8y ago
    I've looked at them, but my question weren't to be answered. I understand that there are interest groups that have fancy websites and lots of people are invested in it, looking all serious. Just like with Homeopathy and Chiropractic, they're not putting the woo-woo up front. Organic farming has its origins in nonsense beliefs, the practices that exist today are still based on them, even if they're regulated now. Farmers practice organic farming for basically two reasons: 1) To make money by selling inefficiently produced food at inflated prices 2) Because they irrationally and dogmatically believe organic farming is "better", without any scientific basis The people in group #1 don't actually believe in the principle, they just believe in the money they'll make. https://southsaskfarmer.com/2015/01/11/why-im-not-an-organic-farmer/ https://southsaskfarmer.com/2015/01/11/why-im-not-an-organic...
    - strainer 8y ago
      > my question weren't to be answered Please don't defend untrue claims in these discussions by asking questions "not to be answered"
      - zeroname 8y ago
        It's called a "rethorical question". You gave the example of safety. It's as if I asked you "who decides what safety is?" and you post a link to some standards body. It's missing the point. It's not untrue to say there is no clearly defined meaning of "safety", just like there is no clearly defined meaning of "organic farming". The fact that there are standards bodies or certifications doesn't change that. The other claim is that organic farming is marketing BS. I don't even see you arguing that it isn't. Even many organic farmers agree! So, what's the issue?
        strainer 8y ago
        > It's called a "rethorical question". No, rhetorical questions have expected answers. You simply rejected answers which you did not expect and then declared your own questions "not to be answered". >It's not untrue ((its true)) to say there is no clearly defined meaning of "safety" Agreed (see - rhetorical). There is not one clear definition of safety, there are many for different contexts and in different jurisdictions. Your idea that organic farming should be atomically definable, doesn't make nonsense bullshit out of organic agriculture and labeling - it has made nonsense of your understanding of organic agriculture. Im not continuing this with you, but may link to it in the next discussion featuring insubstantial and false claims about organic farming. Organic agriculture deserves fair assessment and criticism for these times, not so much name calling. Have a good weekend.

zeroname 8y ago

> Because it is a developed practical system, its not defined by dictionary definition - it is very complicated. It's a bunch of semi-religious practices that were made up on the spot with no scientific basis whatsoever. For you to put it next to Genetic Engineering or Renewables is quite misleading.

strainer 8y ago
How long did you take looking at the references I provided, to answer the questions you asked me ?
- zeroname 8y ago
  I've looked at them, but my question weren't to be answered. I understand that there are interest groups that have fancy websites and lots of people are invested in it, looking all serious. Just like with Homeopathy and Chiropractic, they're not putting the woo-woo up front. Organic farming has its origins in nonsense beliefs, the practices that exist today are still based on them, even if they're regulated now. Farmers practice organic farming for basically two reasons: 1) To make money by selling inefficiently produced food at inflated prices 2) Because they irrationally and dogmatically believe organic farming is "better", without any scientific basis The people in group #1 don't actually believe in the principle, they just believe in the money they'll make. https://southsaskfarmer.com/2015/01/11/why-im-not-an-organic-farmer/ https://southsaskfarmer.com/2015/01/11/why-im-not-an-organic...
  - strainer 8y ago
    > my question weren't to be answered Please don't defend untrue claims in these discussions by asking questions "not to be answered"
    - zeroname 8y ago
      It's called a "rethorical question". You gave the example of safety. It's as if I asked you "who decides what safety is?" and you post a link to some standards body. It's missing the point. It's not untrue to say there is no clearly defined meaning of "safety", just like there is no clearly defined meaning of "organic farming". The fact that there are standards bodies or certifications doesn't change that. The other claim is that organic farming is marketing BS. I don't even see you arguing that it isn't. Even many organic farmers agree! So, what's the issue?
      - strainer 8y ago
        > It's called a "rethorical question". No, rhetorical questions have expected answers. You simply rejected answers which you did not expect and then declared your own questions "not to be answered". >It's not untrue ((its true)) to say there is no clearly defined meaning of "safety" Agreed (see - rhetorical). There is not one clear definition of safety, there are many for different contexts and in different jurisdictions. Your idea that organic farming should be atomically definable, doesn't make nonsense bullshit out of organic agriculture and labeling - it has made nonsense of your understanding of organic agriculture. Im not continuing this with you, but may link to it in the next discussion featuring insubstantial and false claims about organic farming. Organic agriculture deserves fair assessment and criticism for these times, not so much name calling. Have a good weekend.