Fund philosophical research
The founder of this website has performed an intellectual strategy on behalf of Nature (regarding eugenics on nature, GMO) via the critical philosophical initiative PsyReporter.
The author didn’t make a penny of money or personal advantage with the efforts to address issues such as eugenics on nature (GMO). On the contrary, the author had to endure unnatural slander and his home, personal belongings and businesses were destroyed, resulting in significant losses.
PsyReporter is independent, neutral and has no political, ideological or religious interests or motives. The critical questioning of eugenics on nature (GMO) is philosophical of nature, in the generic interest of well-being of nature and humanity's prosperity.
Opponents of GMO punished with “retaliation and pain“.
View report about eugenics on nature (GMO):Eugenics on Nature (GMO)
Several businesses of the founder were mysteriously banned for "no reason".
WordPress plugin ban mystery:WordPress 
Art gallery banned on Twitter:Twitter Moss balls banned on YouTube:Moss ballsIn October 2021, after a UN-chief posted an article about the state of nature on earth, it was decided to report about the attack on this website. We expected that the website could get banned but the website was not banned.
While making money isn’t an interest of PsyReporter, the outlook on continued harassment and destructive actions from GMO proponents (much of large corporations and industry today) does make things more difficult.
With a business background, PsyReporter can create new initiatives to critically, honestly and neutrally address the issue of eugenics on nature (GMO or synthetic biology).
PsyReporter is located in the Netherlands (Europe).
Examples from PsyReporter about war:
“Barbarians reflect on cruelty in nature to fuel cruelty. Moral beings reflect on reason to become reasonable. The potential for philosophy shows what path is right to choose.”
“A lack of potential for reason is the origin of a supposed natural inclination to a ‘state of war’, and ethically, there can be no justification for acts that originate from a lack of reason. One can hide behind error, but error should not be the intended result.”
Examples from PsyReporter about eugenics on nature (GMO):
“An attempt to stand above life as being life logically results in a figurative stone that sinks in the ocean of time. The principle of eugenics resides on the essence of inbreeding of which it is known that it causes fatal problems.”
“Vitality of nature – the foundation of human life – is a motive to question the validity of eugenics on nature before it is practiced. A purposeful Natural environment and food source may be a stronger foundation for humanity.”
Why fund philosophy when it concerns GMO?
Who will speak for plants and animals? A plant or animal cannot speak for itself.
Synthetic biology has been growing fast. In 2017, the amount of money made from GMO accounted for about 2% of American GDP ($400 billion USD revenue). In 2019, the pharmaceutical industry was already investing more than $1 trillion USD per year in synthetic biology ($1,000 billion USD per year). The pharmaceutical industry has been funneling their money to GMO.
The multi-trillion USD synthetic biology revolution, primarily driven by the empirical essence of science, reduces plants to meaningless lumps of matter that can be 'done better' by a company.
How can empirical science possibly provide argumentative resistance for the claim that plant life is meaningless? How can empirical science possibly formulate a reason for morality?
A scientist with a heart is respected by many people in society and can have an effect on culture, but why? Does empirical science support her efficiency for cultural change? Where does 'heart' originate from?
Can a plant be 'done'? Can empirical science answer that question? Can empirical science study the essence of a plant?
Philosophy is essential if the goal is to improve the moral status of plants and to provide a theoretical capacity to protect Nature.
An example:
Philosopher: Plants are sentient beings that should be treated with respect His claim that a plant is a sentient “intelligent, social, complex being” has been contested by some biologists, but a stronger reaction has come from animal-rights activists and vegans who fear their cause is undermined by extending a duty of respect to plants. Source: Irish Times | Book: Plant-Thinking: A Philosophy of Vegetal Life | Moss balls
Want to protect Nature against GMO (synthetic biology)?
Fund philosophical research
PsyReporter can help with the invention of concepts to protect Nature and can be hired on freelance basis.
With funding, PsyReporter can create new online initiatives to address the issue of GMO and Nature's interests.
To support PsyReporter, please fill in the form below or send an email to info@psyreporter.com.