It's A Man's Cern

[pErvinalia]

Often the real issues with genetic modification are secondary effects. For example, consider a crop where a relatively simple genetic change leads to resistance to a particular herbicide. The companies selling the seed (and probably the herbicide itself) would tell farmers to sow it, then spray the shit out of their fields with herbicide, leaving the crop more productive...

Not a good outcome, but the actual modification itself is not toxic, just the consequences of the spraying...

That's exactly what Monsanto has done. Developed glyphosate resistant crops.

[Cunt]

He was the head of Canada's biggest genetics lab, you dumb twit.

Canada used a fucking Chiropractor (they are quacks) as the fucking science minister.

When Suzuki speaks on fruit flies, maybe I'll listen. When he speaks on GMO's, he outs himself as anti-science.

The whole anti-GMO thing can become a bit cult-like for some environmentalists. It is reasonable to be cautious and do some careful testing, but regarding it as automatically evil is not very rational...

He stands firmly against the science. The more you know, the stupider he looks.

I prefer to let agricultural scientists speak about agriculture (Borlaug) and allow 'environmentalists' to speak on 'mentalists'.

[pErvinalia]

He was the head of Canada's biggest genetics lab, you dumb twit.

Canada used a fucking Chiropractor (they are quacks) as the fucking science minister.

When Suzuki speaks on fruit flies, maybe I'll listen. When he speaks on GMO's, he outs himself as anti-science.

And when internet trolls comment on science and scientists, they can be safely ignored.

[JimC]

And what the fuck is this sneering reference to "fruit fly science"?

The study of fruit flies has probably done more for genetics and evolutionary theory than the study of any other single organism. Doing experiments with Drosophila melanogaster was (and probably still is) a required component of any serious university biology degree. It would be good if you commented on things you had a fucking clue about, Cunt...

[Sean Hayden]

Russian troll.

[pErvinalia]

And what the fuck is this sneering reference to "fruit fly science"?

The study of fruit flies has probably done more for genetics and evolutionary theory than the study of any other single organism. Doing experiments with Drosophila melanogaster was (and probably still is) a required component of any serious university biology degree. It would be good if you commented on things you had a fucking clue about, Cunt...

Yep. He's ignorant of science yet somehow deems himself worthy of making comment.

[Cunt]

And what the fuck is this sneering reference to "fruit fly science"?

The study of fruit flies has probably done more for genetics and evolutionary theory than the study of any other single organism. Doing experiments with Drosophila melanogaster was (and probably still is) a required component of any serious university biology degree. It would be good if you commented on things you had a fucking clue about, Cunt...

When the subject is fruit flies, I would defer to his, or ever your expertise.

On GMO's, I think Borlaug makes him look like an uninformed actor.

You are welcome to think anything you want, but I don't respect his views outside his specialty. Would you respect a scientist who speaks out against GMO's, and should know better? How about one who screeches about stopping development, while heating his big beautiful home with delicious, carbon-producing energy?

His 'Nature of Things' had a great on on running though. The Perfect Runner.

If you think he's right, JimC, I guess you better start running.

[JimC]

I prefer a brisk walk, myself...

And his opinion on the GMO issue is one that I would listen to, and respect, coming as it does from someone with a great knowledge of genetics. I have read a considerable amount from both sides on the pros and cons. My take is that there are dangers, but also opportunities, and that a reflex complete ban would not be the best option, as I've already said.

[laklak]

Think about what would happen if chimp genes got into potatoes. You'd open the bag and the fuckers would tear your face off like that woman on Oprah.

[pErvinalia]

[rainbow]

Didn't the Hunt guy say more nuanced things than that?

Science is pretty unforgiving. I thought Bill Nye and David Suzuki were scientists for awhile, then realized that the real scientists publish, and are subject to the scathing criticisms of experts in their fields.

I've reviewed a number of papers. Scathing criticism isn't really the norm, reserved for form rather than content.
There is a code though:
"Insufficient data to back your conclusions." - You didn't really do enough work.
"Contradicts the previous study." - You didn't do the literature survey, did you?
"The level of interpretation of results needs attention" - You've not a clue what you're talking about.
"The methodology is somewhat unorthodox" - Just plain sloppy work.

If a scientist is really invested in their work, having their betters prove it wrong can be difficult. That's why I used 'scathing' incorrectly.

A scientist should not be invested in anything but increasing knowledge of the natural world. Being proved wrong is part of the process.
Rule No 1. One learns more from one's mistakes than from one's successes.