Short answer: they're in the wrong, let's lock them up and throw away the keys.
Long answer:
Greenpeace really bugs me. I'm one of those college edumacated liberal cretins, and I am quite in agreement with basic environmentalism. Renewable energy sources utilizing nuclear power as an intermediary until full implementation, better fuel economy standards, veggies over meat, etc. There's nothing wrong with those, and while I vehemently oppose "organic" farming, I can see the point of using pesticides as sparingly as possible (especially as a chemist, whew, talk about nasty stuff...). I also understand that the layperson has no idea how genetic engineering works, or why it poses no health hazards. Back in my junior year of college, I had to take a sociology class for some utterly demented reason. Not only did I discover that Feynman's statement vis-a-vis cargo cult science very much applies to that subject, I also found out that one's socio-political leanings have an immense effect on how one perceives the world. In one of the last assignments, I had to write an essay on economic globalization. I chose to focus on how GE/GM foods had been profitable and beneficial in mitigating world hunger. I had to address the huge elephant in the room, is that stuff harmful? My brief research of the scientific literature revealed nothing of the sort (mostly dealing with rodents, but they are a pretty good analog for humans). While most of the papers dealing with GE/GM health effects came from China, they were published in peer reviewed journals, and as such should not be doubted by the layperson. What does happen is cross-pollination, where GE crops and non-GE crops mingle. If this involves two different farmers, legal problems will result. It's unfortunate, but that's just nature.
I suppose I should mention Monsanto, as they tend to pop up in such discussions. Let me be frank, the guys running Monsanto graduated from the Jeffrey Dharmer school of Business Ethics. They're litigious pricks (that cross-pollination thing above? Yeah, they like to sue - the non-GE farmer!), assholes in every sense of the word, and a fine example of how capitalism can be abhorrently bad. BUT, the people working there are not, especially the scientists. You have to understand something: there are very clear guidelines on how experiments must be run, especially if the goal is to create something fit for human consumption. Every possible health effect must be analyzed (this is usually outsourced, in most cases to China due to the low cost of research there). It is highly unlikely that some super toxic/mutagenic/carcinogenic crop eventually ends up on the market. Everybody in the chain of R&D, production, marketing, management, quality control, and toxicological research has a stake in the success. Every step is repeatedly checked (particularly the research), and any problems would jeopardize the careers of all involved. In case you don't understand how brutal the punishment for faulty research is, look up people like Andrew Wakefield or Martin Fleischmann. In short, the idea that companies like Monsanto deliberately or accidentally poison people with their products is laughable. The real world doesn't work that way, my scientifically illiterate hippie adversaries. If there were any concern regarding the safety of GE/GM crops, it would have been known about at this point. But hey, if you have any concerns, PubMed provides free abstracts in journals dealing with food safety. Go do the bloody research for yourself, and please stop pretending you are more qualified than real scientists. kthxbai.
Oh yeah, wasn't this destruction of property? Guess they're not just idiots, but also criminals. Go figure...
Long answer:
Greenpeace really bugs me. I'm one of those college edumacated liberal cretins, and I am quite in agreement with basic environmentalism. Renewable energy sources utilizing nuclear power as an intermediary until full implementation, better fuel economy standards, veggies over meat, etc. There's nothing wrong with those, and while I vehemently oppose "organic" farming, I can see the point of using pesticides as sparingly as possible (especially as a chemist, whew, talk about nasty stuff...). I also understand that the layperson has no idea how genetic engineering works, or why it poses no health hazards. Back in my junior year of college, I had to take a sociology class for some utterly demented reason. Not only did I discover that Feynman's statement vis-a-vis cargo cult science very much applies to that subject, I also found out that one's socio-political leanings have an immense effect on how one perceives the world. In one of the last assignments, I had to write an essay on economic globalization. I chose to focus on how GE/GM foods had been profitable and beneficial in mitigating world hunger. I had to address the huge elephant in the room, is that stuff harmful? My brief research of the scientific literature revealed nothing of the sort (mostly dealing with rodents, but they are a pretty good analog for humans). While most of the papers dealing with GE/GM health effects came from China, they were published in peer reviewed journals, and as such should not be doubted by the layperson. What does happen is cross-pollination, where GE crops and non-GE crops mingle. If this involves two different farmers, legal problems will result. It's unfortunate, but that's just nature.
I suppose I should mention Monsanto, as they tend to pop up in such discussions. Let me be frank, the guys running Monsanto graduated from the Jeffrey Dharmer school of Business Ethics. They're litigious pricks (that cross-pollination thing above? Yeah, they like to sue - the non-GE farmer!), assholes in every sense of the word, and a fine example of how capitalism can be abhorrently bad. BUT, the people working there are not, especially the scientists. You have to understand something: there are very clear guidelines on how experiments must be run, especially if the goal is to create something fit for human consumption. Every possible health effect must be analyzed (this is usually outsourced, in most cases to China due to the low cost of research there). It is highly unlikely that some super toxic/mutagenic/carcinogenic crop eventually ends up on the market. Everybody in the chain of R&D, production, marketing, management, quality control, and toxicological research has a stake in the success. Every step is repeatedly checked (particularly the research), and any problems would jeopardize the careers of all involved. In case you don't understand how brutal the punishment for faulty research is, look up people like Andrew Wakefield or Martin Fleischmann. In short, the idea that companies like Monsanto deliberately or accidentally poison people with their products is laughable. The real world doesn't work that way, my scientifically illiterate hippie adversaries. If there were any concern regarding the safety of GE/GM crops, it would have been known about at this point. But hey, if you have any concerns, PubMed provides free abstracts in journals dealing with food safety. Go do the bloody research for yourself, and please stop pretending you are more qualified than real scientists. kthxbai.
Oh yeah, wasn't this destruction of property? Guess they're not just idiots, but also criminals. Go figure...
