From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Thu Aug 29 2002 - 16:54:29 MDT
Harvey Newstrom wrote:
>
> On Thursday, August 29, 2002, at 10:30 am, Charles Hixson wrote:
>
>> The problem is... butterflies were picked as the species to worry
>> about because they were photogenic, not because they were the one
>> most endangered.
>
>
> Do you have any evidence to support this conspiracy theory? I thought
> that the butterflies were picked because their habitat was closest to
> the fields where the BT pesticide plants would be deployed. It makes
> sense that the closest insects (besides the pests in the fields that
> we want to kill) would be the ones to study.
>
> --
> Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
What conspiracy theory? That's just practical politics. Yes,
butterflies were near to the fields. So were a lot of other insects
that weren't even considered. And I don't mean the intentionally
targeted species.
-- -- Charles Hixson Gnu software that is free, The best is yet to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:31 MST