Milkweed loss hurts monarchs

[Mona Miller]

Milkweed loss hurts monarchs
http://www1.umn.edu/news/features/2012/ ... 78473.html

[Paul Cherubini]

"Now that we have a better handle on the causes for the decline in monarch numbers, the areas outside agricultural fields are more important than they used to be," says Oberhauser,

So Karen is essentially saying the same thing I have said repeatedly on this forum: that the milkweed that grows along the margins of the GMO crops is especially important monarch breeding habitat nowadays. Milkweed like this:

[Mona Miller]

This is the whole paragraph, you took part of it to prove your point.
"Now that we have a better handle on the causes for the decline in monarch numbers, the areas outside agricultural fields are more important than they used to be," says Oberhauser, an associate professor in the University's Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology. "It underlines the importance of putting milkweed in garden plantings, prairies, and roadsides."

Karen did not say that margins along side GM fields are important. This is your Monsanto agenda.

[Paul Cherubini]

Karen did not say that margins along side GM fields are important. This is your Monsanto agenda.

She said: "the areas outside agricultural fields are more important than they used to be,"
Margins along side GMO corn and soybean fields = "areas outside of agricultural fields."

You can't have it both ways; i.e. lament the loss of milkweeds that used to grow more abundantly WITHIN the GMO corn and soybean crops, but then not be interested in preserving the milkweed that still grows abundantly along the margins of the GMO crops.

[blazing star]

Bottom line of this thread:

Do we believe Chip, founder of Monarch Watch, when he says that GMO crops are integral to population declines of the monarch butterfly

OR

do we believe Paul, who has been identified to profit from the killing of insects and who appears to have ties to profiting from GMO products, who states that GMO crops are benefiting and enhancing monarch butterfly populations.

Applying logic, this one's a no brainer except to one person.

[Paul Cherubini]

do we believe Paul, who states that GMO crops are benefiting and enhancing monarch butterfly populations.

Untrue. I have never said anything like that. I have said that although it's true milkweed has been eliminated from GMO farm fields, the monarchs continue to be spectacularly abundant on these very same farmlands because of the extremely extensive roadsides and ditches that border the GMO crops are not sprayed, hence milkweed continues to be abundant.

So even a 12 year old farm kid with a video camera could ride his/her bicycle down a farm road and shoot videos like these:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7owV6o6xNWM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKmDId55pfc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MqrvAxTl0I

[blazing star]

I know what you mean. It's tragic that GMO crops continue to deplete monarch populations. It must be difficult for you to live in such contradiction, i.e. try to peddle GMO propaganda and, on the other hand, espouse that you care for the health of the monarch butterfly.

[Paul Cherubini]

It's tragic that GMO crops continue to deplete monarch populations.

There's no more "depletion" of milkweed going on WITHIN the GMO crop fields because the milkweed in those fields was killed off several years ago as the owners of this midwestern chain of pesticide dealerships explain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDA4OfTFolE

So as long as milkweeds continue to be abundant along the margins of the GMO crop fields, monarchs will continue to be abundant on GMO farmlands like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7owV6o6xNWM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKmDId55pfc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MqrvAxTl0I

[blazing star]

Fail

[Mona Miller]

Dr. Francis Xavier Villablanca (Cal Poly University) did a great job of explaining the scientific method of posting data over the Paul Cherubini method. This was posted to the Western Monarch listserve where Paul Cherubini also continually posts misinformation, too.

http://www.butterflydigest.com/s/digest ... e;id=90023
"Hi all,
Because Cal Poly is responsible for this list serve, it is important
that we point out miss information.

The Scientific Method flows like this:

Data > Analysis > Interpretation > Possible conclusion

Every step of this process is clearly articulated so that the worth of the conclusions can be assessed.

There are other, unscientific, even illogical approaches.

Take for example Paul's which is something like this.

Conclusion > photo to support the conclusion > posting conclusion on listserve

This is the "expert based" approach, which has been know to be severely flawed for quite a long time. it leads to this type of thinking: "Nothing will happen to me if I jump out of the window on the tenth floor, I can prove it because when I fall from the tenth to the ninth, I can take a picture to show that nothing has happened. And I can show you again as I fall from the ninth to the eighth and so on. See!" This approach is flawed because it presumes that everything is already known and that we just need the "expert" to tell us.

Let's see if we can try and be a tintsy more scientific.

FXV"

[Paul Cherubini]

Dr. Francis Xavier Villablanca (Cal Poly University) did a great job of explaining the scientific method of posting data over the Paul Cherubini method. This was posted to the Western Monarch listserve where Paul Cherubini also continually posts misinformation, too.

You havn't identified any misinformation. This thread is about "Milkweed Loss Hurts Monarchs" and I have been pointing out, using videos, that the milkweed that grows along the margins of the GMO crops is especially important monarch breeding habitat nowadays.

So far you and blazing star havn't posted any information refuting my claim.

[blazing star]

I used to research, and post, an abundance of information disputing your post contents and videos. I also pointed out that your silly videos are not "evidence" of anything as you cannot look at a snapshot in time to extrapolate any long term, meaningful information. You continue to go on posting in your illogical manner, contributing no evidence with your post content. Fail = the manner in which I now can summarize your posts.

[Mona Miller]

Dr. Francis Xavier Villablanca (Cal Poly University) did a great job of explaining the scientific method of posting data over the Paul Cherubini method. This was posted to the Western Monarch listserve where Paul Cherubini also continually posts misinformation, too.

You havn't identified any misinformation. This thread is about "Milkweed Loss Hurts Monarchs" and I have been pointing out, using videos, that the milkweed that grows along the margins of the GMO crops is especially important monarch breeding habitat nowadays.

So far you and blazing star havn't posted any information refuting my claim.

Neither have you.

[Mona Miller]

Paul,

Your claims, pictures, video, are all a bunch of frass (for those who don't know this word, that is butterfly poop).

[Paul Cherubini]

I used to research, and post, an abundance of information disputing your post contents and videos. I also pointed out that your silly videos are not "evidence" of anything as you cannot look at a snapshot in time to extrapolate any long term, meaningful information.

What is your position on GMO crop margin milkweed? Should it be saved? Should it even be expanded? Or do you think it should not be saved because it's contaminated with pesticides?

[Mona Miller]

The GMO roundup ready crops are responsible for destroying hundreds, of thousands of areas of habitat/milkweed and you want to know about the margins of these fields. I think you enjoy posting nonsense. Why Monarch Watch hasn't kicked your butt off this list is beyond me. They have already kicked your butt off dplex-L email listserve.

BTW, all this information is accessible on Internet Searches. I guess you are out of luck.

[Paul Cherubini]

The GMO roundup ready crops are responsible for destroying hundreds, of thousands of areas of habitat/milkweed and you want to know about the margins of these fields.

But as I've said repeatedly, it's old news that milkweed is gone from within the GMO crop fields. It was gone 5 years ago. So now a decision has to be made about whether or not it's worthwhile to try and save the milkweed that is still pretty abundant along the margins of the GMO fields.

Some conservationists (me) think the GMO crop margin milkweed should be saved because the pesticide that drifts from the sprays used within the crop is insufficient to seriously affect the weeds and bugs that live in the margins.

How do you and blazing star feel about whether or not this GMO crop margin milkweeds (and nectar plants) are worth saving, (and perhaps expanded to make them even more abundant)?

[Mona Miller]

I have very bad feelings about areas near GMO fields and even worse feelings about taking any information from you because of your devious way of presenting information. If it looks like a duck, then it is a duck. But, with your information it may look like it is alright, but you usually leave out, twist, and falsify that information to promote your agenda--that agenda is Monsanto and all their products.

The Monarch Watch Forum is not the right forum to push Monsanto products.

[Paul Cherubini]

I have very bad feelings about areas near GMO fields

So it that a "Yes GMO Crop Margin Milkweed Should be Saved" because it's usually productive monarch breeding habitat?

or "No GMO Crop Margin Milkweed Should Not be Saved" because it creates a population sink (fools female monarchs into laying eggs on milkweeds where the caterpillars usually die from pesticide contamination?

[Mona Miller]

I don't know what you are talking about. Who is caring for these margins or who is destroying these margins? They are being subjected to chemicals. You say that it is insufficient to cause problems. But, I don't believe a word that you say. You are the ultimate deceiver.

[Paul Cherubini]

I don't know what you are talking about. Who is caring for these margins or who is destroying these margins? They are being subjected to chemicals.

So does that mean you havn't decided yet whether or not the milkweed that's abundant along the GMO crop margins should be saved? Farmers usually own the Gravel road ditches bordering the GMO crop margins. Government usually owns the Paved road ditches bordering the GMO crop margins.

[Mona Miller]

I'd have to say that that milkweed is already lost to the chemicals, which get sprayed on it. Chalk that one up to another lose due to Monsanto and their chemicals and GM crops. We don't need any of your video or pictures to prove that it is there or not.

Who pays you to sit and write these nonsensical emails?

[Paul Cherubini]

I'd have to say that that milkweed is already lost to the chemicals, which get sprayed on it. Chalk that one up to another lose due to Monsanto and their chemicals and GM crops.

Before GMO crops existed, the corn and soybean crops were sprayed with insecticides and fungicides. So how come you lament the loss of milkweeds that used to grow within the sprayed corn and soybean crops? Yet on the other hand, you do not favor saving the GMO crop margin milkweeds even though they are not sprayed directly with insecticides and fungicides?

[Mona Miller]

What they are using now is stronger and they are using more weed killer in the fields due to the roundup ready crops. Supposedly, the weeds die but the crops don't (there are many roundup resistant weeds now that are becoming a major problem for farmers causing them to use more roundup and other stronger weed killers). You should know that because this is your business. But, instead of showing us what you know, you twist reality.

Like I said, how much do they pay you to sit around and write these nonsensical emails?

[Paul Cherubini]

Milkweed loss hurts monarchs
http://www1.umn.edu/news/features/2012/ ... 78473.html

In that article Karen Oberhauser says: "Also, since monarchs lay more eggs on milkweeds if they're in cultivated fields, egg production was disproportionately affected by the loss of agricultural milkweed plants."

But back in 1996, Karen, Lincoln Brower, Chip Taylor, Sonia Altizer, and several others scientists got together and wrote this:


In other words, although they now lament the loss of milkweeds within crop fields due to the widespread adoption of herbicide tolerant crops, 15 years ago they considered those same crops to be "massively contaminated" with pesticides.

I'd have to say that that milkweed is already lost to the chemicals, which get sprayed on it. Chalk that one up to another lose due to Monsanto and their chemicals and GM crops.

Mona, you appear to be making that same "massively contaminated" assumption in regards to the crop margin milkweed that Karen, Lincoln, Chip and Sonia made back in 1996 in regards to the within crop milkweed, hence you do not think it's worth saving.

[Mona Miller]

Paul,

You are like a broken record that keeps skipping. The truth according to Paul Cherubini is not the whole truth. Paul Cherubini will promote pesticides/herbicides 100% of the time. His objective is the distribution of propaganda for the chemical companies that he works for.

Whenever he can, he insults scientists and also hates people who care about the environment.

Paul Cherubini will tell you that there are no problems with genetically modifying crops or dousing them with huge quantities of herbicides (weed killers). He'll tell you that Monarchs can use the edges of crop fields where these huge quantities of herbicides are applied. Anyone that raises butterflies knows that if they applied these same chemicals at the same rate on their property that they wouldn't have butterflies.

Paul Cherubini's posts seem to contain valid information. After all he has pictures and videos, to show what is really happening (those can be and are manipulated). He also posts data from other research, which he also manipulates.

Paul Cherubini, I'm using your full name so that other people in the world will know that your claims are not valid. I will keep posting your full name until the world wide web is full of the truth about you.