Posts by Joe Wylie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to Sacha,
In an ideal world they could sue themselves:
it's worth noting that the image of the single organic farmer managing a couple of hectares is not real. Most organic farms are huge enterprises usually owned by the same companies that produce the non-organic crops. Often side by side.
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to Steve Barnes,
. . . say it ain't so.... Joe, or Bart.
Bart's the expert here. And while we're on it, I'd like to know this: Is there any way that an organic crop could contaminate a GM crop?
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Are there not laws against using electronic media (phones, emails, etc), or even normal mail, to intimidate or threaten others?
I seem to recall Barry Crump in one of his books claiming to have sent a thinly veiled death threat to an uncooperative civil servant. He received a visit from a policeman, who explained that such things were specifically prohibited under rules governing the use of Her Majesty's mails.
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Oh and if you want experimental proof of my hypothesis look at the "escape" of DNA from the millions of hectares of GM crops grown for the last 2 decades. That strongly suggests experimental observations of (lack of) harm correlate well with theory.
If by "(lack of) harm" you mean sci-fi scenarios such as the appearance of new hybrid species then fair enough. Unlikely, but not impossible. As you'll know, the more immediate risk is from opportunistic lawsuits against farmers who have the misfortune to find their crops contaminated with patented strains. It's a real and serious issue for some.
-
. . . use it as Green Credintials for the disaster recovery story?
Only if Gerry gets a makeover.
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to Bart Janssen,
Bart, I appreciate information being made available, particularly in a form that's intelligible to non-specialists. Obviously it's rather more complex than Heinemann being on the side of the angels, and AgResearch's Jimmy Suttie being in the likes of Monsanto's pocket. If you're really so wedded to the dedicated civil servant's view of the public interest as a nuisance factor, perhaps you should be questioning the motivation for Russell's show.
-
If anything it is this kind of "scientist" vs "scientist" conflict that is one of the most complex to understand when you are outside the specialist field being debated.
In other words, STFU, and you may touch the hem of my garment in order to ward off that awful Sue Kedgley. You're such a charmer Bart.
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to nzlemming,
Most of it seems to be about messing with DNA which is against the natural order (which I believe to be code for "God's Word")
Rational discussion is not a huge factor in the GMO debate.
Given that there are scientists on both sides of the debate, that sounds like the kind of unfounded folk belief that you find so risible among those horrid anti-GE god botherers.
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to Carol Stewart,
Thanks for that Carol, much appreciated.
Imagine the sound of the New Zealand bush if we defended our own wildlife with the compassion we bestowed on Happy Feet.
I believe that Islander referred here a while back to that phenomenal science writer Tim Flannery's imagining of that very thing. Here's how it goes:
I would gladly remain ignorant of the joy of the haka, or even the heart stopping beauty of Dame Kiri Te Kanawa singing Songs of the Auvergne, for the privilege of waking to a symphony of 'the most tuneable silver sound imaginable'. Aotearoa's multitudes of birds performed that symphony each dawn for over 60 million years. It was a glorious riot of sound with its own special meaning, for it was a confirmation of the health of a wondrous and unique ecosystem. To my regret, I arrived in New Zealand in the late twentieth century only to find most of the orchestra seats empty. Walking through the ancient forest, whose still living trees were once browsed by moa, I heard nothing but the whisper of leaves blowing in the wind. It was like the rustle of the last curtain call on an orchestra that will be no more......... Tim Flannery, The Future Eaters
-
Hard News: Science: it's complicated, in reply to David Winter,
. . . I can't help but think that if we spent just a little more time talking about the big awe-inspiring stories in science, and how hundreds of people have contributed to their creation, we'd understand how science works a little better.
For science to need to promote and justify itself as a special interest seems an acknowledgement of its having retreated before the irrational. Banging the drum for something as pragmatic and demonstrable as science can come over a bit like Act on Campus doing a ritual 3 cheers for capitalism.