From: Brian D Williams (talon57@well.com)
Date: Thu May 02 2002 - 08:01:10 MDT
>From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com>
>The 'organics' industry is the core of unscientific luddism. The
>claim that 'organic' food is any healthier than other food of the
>same species and breed is entirely unsupported by scientific
>evidence.
This is incorrect, produce raised organically is higher in
nutritional content. Maybe not significantly enough for you
however.
>The industry is at the core of using anti-technology scare tactics
>to boost the perceived value of its products to the consumer, and
>organic farmers are the grassroots of support for luddite
>terrorists, providing an underground railroad for transportation,
>shelter and off-books employment of individuals engaged in luddite
>terrorism.
The core belief of "organics" is that heavy use of agricultural
chemicals is a lose/lose proposition. You consume things that
aren't necessary and may be bad for you, and the effects of these
chemicals on the ecosystem is well documented.
I do not believe for a second that the majority of organic farmers
support luddite terrorists, and I doubt anyone else will either.
>Orders of magnitude are irrelevant. Bacteria and virii are known
>to trade DNA with their victims and each other, which is a primary
>contributor to evolution and genetic drift. Hybridization is a
>man-made technique for speeding up the process, and gene splicing
>in the laboratory is similarly simply skipping millions of years
>of evolutionary time. Hybridization is a technology for altering
>the genetic makeup of a breed of organism. As a technology, it is
>non-natural and non-"organic". Therefore, true "organic" farmers
>should not use any domesticated plants or animals, they should
>only use the most wild varieties.
Hybridization can only proceed in slow steps, the genotype resists
changes that are too radical, many see this as a good thing. Non-
successful hybrids do not survive in an ecosystem. The ecosystem
has a built in defense against chimeras.
Hybridization as taken a new turn as directed evolution, which may
prove to be a good deal more acceptable.
You are using a different definition for "organic" than the
accepted ones.
>Corn was entirely created by interbreeding several different plant
>species, starting with a Teosinte plant which is markedly
>different from its modern relative. As such, it is an entirely
>non-"organic" species. Modern cattle and sheep are similarly
>highly modified from several closely related interbred species.
Again, you are attempting to use a non-standard definition of
"organic".
I like your reference to corn however, if you check the website for
seeds of change, www.seedsofchange.com, you will find many new
varieties as well as heirloom varieties of corn and other plants,
all produced without gene splicing.
Try a brandywine tomato, you'll throw rocks at anything else.
The good thing is that you formed a seperate organization to pursue
this for which I commend you.
Brian
Member:
Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
SBC/Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:46 MST