Greenpeace voodoo science was slam dunked last week by real scientists. GP do heavy
political science then call it climate science, bio science. They should be
ashamed of what they are doing.
The letter campaign
was organized by Richard Roberts, chief scientific officer of New England
Biolabs and, with Phillip Sharp, the winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in
physiology or medicine for the discovery of genetic sequences known as introns.
The campaign has a website, supportprecisionagriculture.org, that includes a running
list of the signatories, and the group plans to hold a news conference Thursday
morning at the National Press Club in Washington.
“We’re scientists.
We understand the logic of science. It's easy to see what Greenpeace is doing
is damaging and is anti-science," Roberts told The Washington Post.
“Greenpeace initially, and then some of their allies, deliberately went out of
their way to scare people. It was a way for them to raise money for their
cause."
GP is wrong on perhaps 99% of their advocacies.
Anti-coal, anti-nuke, anti-fossil fuels (yet their leaders proudly and
braggingly announce that they jet set to this and that country and continent for various meetings,
riding on planes that use 100% fossil fuel...), anti-GMO, anti-capitalism, etc.
The 1% where they are correct is campaign against solid wastes that are thrown anywhere.
"From its early days of dodging harpoons and
Japanese whalers in outboard motor boats, Greenpeace has parlayed media savvy,
flagrant dishonesty and an aptitude for political theater into a $360
million-plus per year empire with offices in more than 40 countries." http://www.forbes.com/.../greenpeace-more-dishonest.../...
GMOs are safe. Most if not all the rice that I and millions of Filipinos have been
eating since the 70s are GM rice. 4 decades or more have passed, none has become a frankenstein. And no food riots despite the
population rising from around 40+ M in the 70s to 102 M now.
There are some scattered studies that perhaps were
not peer reviewed or published in lesser known papers saying that GMOs are dangerous and scary. The 107 scientists who
speak up here are top caliber ones, Nobel laureates. Between these 100% scientists
and perhaps 100% non-scientist GP militants, the former has more credibility.
I think of more modernity, more prosperity, more food
efficiency. The PH will soon have 200, then 300 M people and there will never be
food riots. Thanks to modern science, thanks to GM science.
Our farm caretaker (now 62 yo) in Pangasinan told me few
years ago that when he was young, he was helping his father in rice farming and
the "good" quality rice then, non-GM (no IRRI perhaps yet), could be
harvested after 6 months. So after 6 months, harvest was very
small -- subjected to heavy rains, typhoons, flooding, rats, birds, wild ducks, kuhol,
many other pests.
The key to good rice farming is to harvest the crop in a
short period. The dominant varieties are still harvestable after 4 months, but
there are many varieties now that are harvestable after 3 months, even 2 1/2
months. Plant quick, harvest quick, reduce exposure to various pests, and
farmers' income will be higher, consumers' rice supply will be higher. Thanks
to GM rice.
----------------See also:
Agri Econ 18: Israel's Modern, High Tech Farming, March 17, 2015
Agri Econ 21, Rice protectionism as poverty-maximizing policy, September 25, 2015
Agri Econ 22, Why "peak food" hypothesis is wrong, December 25, 2015
Agri Econ 23, Why forever Agrarian Reform should stop, March 09, 2016
GM crops and rising population, March 10, 2011
Pilipinas Forum 4: GMOs are good, August 31, 2011
GMOs, Greenpeace and Public Health, January 15, 2014
Pilipinas Forum 4: GMOs are good, August 31, 2011
GMOs, Greenpeace and Public Health, January 15, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment