[Kryptid]

Leading to one of the other possible explanations the program is meant to reduce food production and increase hunger, as a part of a depopulation

But food production hasn't been reduced. Take this 2013 article from the United Nations website, for example: https://www.un.org/en/africa/osaa/pdf/pubs/2013africanagricultures.pdf It states:

Contrary to popular belief, agricultural production in Africa has increased steadily over the last 30 years: its value has almost tripled (+160%), showing an increase that clearly exceeds the growth rate for global agricultural production over the same period (+100%), almost identical to that of South America (+174%), and below but comparable to growth in Asia (+212%).

1. Cereal production has increased by 125%, yields by 32%, and cultivated land by 70% in 30 years

There are charts on page 20 of the article that show crop production from 1980 to 2010. We don't see a drop in crop production starting in 2006. The trend of increase continues instead. Page 22 shows a further breakdown of the specific kinds of crops and all of them are still increasing from 2006 to 2010.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Leading to one of the other possible explanations the program is meant to reduce food production and increase hunger, as a part of a depopulation

But food production hasn't been reduced. Take this 2013 article from the United Nations website, for example: https://www.un.org/en/africa/osaa/pdf/pubs/2013africanagricultures.pdf It states:

Contrary to popular belief, agricultural production in Africa has increased steadily over the last 30 years: its value has almost tripled (+160%), showing an increase that clearly exceeds the growth rate for global agricultural production over the same period (+100%), almost identical to that of South America (+174%), and below but comparable to growth in Asia (+212%).

1. Cereal production has increased by 125%, yields by 32%, and cultivated land by 70% in 30 years

There are charts on page 20 of the article that show crop production from 1980 to 2010. We don't see a drop in crop production starting in 2006. The trend of increase continues instead. Page 22 shows a further breakdown of the specific kinds of crops and all of them are still increasing from 2006 to 2010.

Ok you are referencing a 2013 article that is reporting on the previous 30 year trend.  AGRA starts in 2006 and as the article I referenced stated African countries were seeing a 17% increase.

The article upto 2010 only covers the first 4 years of ARGA it's now been running 15 years, with the latter 11 years not accounted for.

ARGA was meant to increase food production by 100% it managed 1%, I think the hunger issue is comming from population  increase and so increased food demand ARGA isnt supporting

[Kryptid]

The article upto 2010 only covers the first 4 years of ARGA it's now been running 15 years, with the latter 11 years not accounted for.

So do you have data showing that food production actually decreased instead of increased after 2010?

[Jolly2 (OP)]

The article upto 2010 only covers the first 4 years of ARGA it's now been running 15 years, with the latter 11 years not accounted for.

So do you have data showing that food production actually decreased instead of increased after 2010?

Well the 21% reduction in crops as previously stated.

There is this article
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/gates-stop-funding-industrial-farming-southern-africa/

[Kryptid]

Well the 21% reduction in crops as previously stated.

Where are the statistics to back that claim up? I don't see "21%" anywhere in that article you just linked. A link to an authoritative source would be preferred. Your linked website has "Big Pharma" as one of its categories. Those who use that term unironically are often conspiracy theorists. I see that several of the people associated with that site are anti-vaxxers, so that's another red flag. Any claims you see there should be back-checked before being accepted as truth.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Well the 21% reduction in crops as previously stated.

Where are the statistics to back that claim up? I don't see "21%"

It's in the first article I quoted it directly before.

anywhere in that article you just linked. A link to an authoritative source would be preferred. Your linked website has "Big Pharma" as one of its categories. Those who use that term unironically are often conspiracy theorists. I see that several of the people associated with that site are anti-vaxxers, so that's another red flag. Any claims you see there should be back-checked before being accepted as truth.

The secound article related to an open letter send to the gates foundation,  basically because AGRA is destroying small scale farmers essentially because Gates is interested in profiting of the poverty.

[Kryptid]

It's in the first article I quoted it directly before.

No, the quote is about the production of cereals specifically, not crops in general. I still want to know where they got their data from.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

It's in the first article I quoted it directly before.

No, the quote is about the production of cereals specifically, not crops in general. I still want to know where they got their data from.

I'm not entirely sure still, it appears the ARGA is really similar to schemes previously ran in India were GM crops with Roundup were sold to small scale farmers, which trapped them into each year having to buy seeds and pesticides from Monsanto,  Monsanto has a degree of investment from Gates it should be noted.
Normally a farmer would save some seed for the next years planting,  but Monsanto seeds were designed to make that impossible, the only way to plant again was to buy new seeds, which increased the costs that many farmers couldn't afford.
The AGRA scheme appears to be another way to profit from farming more then it is actually about increasing productivity.

[Kryptid]

Which doesn't mean Gates is out to thin the population via starvation.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Which doesn't mean Gates is out to thin the population via starvation.

Means he could be potentially.  Maybe he prefers suicide, thousands of Indian farmers committed suicide because they could no longer afford to continue farming thanks to similar schemes ran in India.

Again who elected Bill Gates to go interfere with other countries? If he wanted to use his money to support different counties it's one thing, but he isn't doing that, he is actively controlling the programs he invests in and gaining returns on those investments.  This should be illegal. It isnt philanthropy,  he is using his wealth to gain power across the world and directly controlling the programs.  Are we all left to hope some Hilter type character doesnt become a billionaire in the future?

[Kryptid]

Means he could be potentially.

Any number of world leaders could potentially send us into a nuclear war too. Just because they have that power doesn't mean they plan on doing it.

[Bored chemist]

Means he could be potentially.

Not really, because, if you and I were hungry enough, we would gang up on him and hit him with a rock.

But it's deeper than that; you seem not to understand that the seeds in my garden will grow, no mater what bits of paper BG has got saying he "owns" them. The same is true for the seeds on the farm.

He doesn't have control of anything.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Means he could be potentially.

Not really, because, if you and I were hungry enough, we would gang up on him and hit him with a rock.

But it's deeper than that; you seem not to understand that the seeds in my garden will grow, no mater what bits of paper BG has got saying he "owns" them. The same is true for the seeds on the farm.

He doesn't have control of anything.

Not the case the Monsanto seeds were genetically edited so they only produce one crop, you cant save seed and replant for the next year, which forces farmers in contracts with Monsanto to buy new seeds every year. The farmers are renting the seeds 

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Means he could be potentially.

Any number of world leaders could potentially send us into a nuclear war too. Just because they have that power doesn't mean they plan on doing it.

There is a slight difference a world leader from politics has gone through the election process, and is monitored by the public and the associated parliament, an oligarchy justs has a Ton of cash how he or she got it can vary, but they dont have the same level of scrutiny,  and they also have no mandate from the public.

[Bored chemist]

There is a slight difference

Only very slight.

[Bored chemist]

Not the case the Monsanto seeds were genetically edited so they only produce one crop,

Then don't use them.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

Not the case the Monsanto seeds were genetically edited so they only produce one crop,

Then don't use them.

Honestly you're a genius.

[Bored chemist]

Honestly you're a genius.

It's a relative thing.

[Jolly2 (OP)]

So David attenborough is in total agreement with starving people to death as a means of population control. Sociopaths run this world clearer by the day

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/david-attenborough-says-sending-food-famine-ridden-countries-barmy-8823602.html

[Colin2B]

This topic contains posts which misrepresent and are defamatory or libellous.
The OP needs to represent information correctly or they will find their posting rights are limited.