I got so immersed in the 2 issues of New Scientist sent to me — so immersed that I got to thinking about why I didn’t go into science.
Back in high school, I took AP Physics and went into college with some science credits. But instead of pursuing that, I just fulfilled the science requirement by using those credits and taking a philosophy-esque class that asked, “What IS science?” A physicist taught that class, which might give you some idea as to what the answer was.
Anyway. Some things I learned from New Scientist:
- Chair from hair! One dude’s mixed human hair with a polymer resin to create a stronger-than-fiberglass chair. Waste not hair, want not chair.
- The intelligent design peeps have set up their own sicence lab called Biologic Institute, funded by the Discovery Institute, which appears to have a helluva lotta money. The idea is to try and put out science-backed, peer-reviewed research findings that support intelligent design’s view. So far, their findings sound fishy.
- 60% of Americans still have no idea that they’re eating GM foods on a regular basis. If we simply just made more people aware of the GM in the foods they already eat, we could have a much bigger organic and local food movement.
Since New Scientist serendipitously landed in my mailbox, it’s turned into one of those things that make me want to check out more things that don’t immediately interest me. By that, I mean that I’m gonna become a more regular reader of the New Scientist — esp. since it has a nice enviro section and an enviro-blog.
I do NOT mean that I’m gonna finally learn the rules of football.
I have to admit that I don’t get that uptight about GM food. It’s not like we’ve never modified the gene pools of our food previously. Chicken and corn in the united states both changed dramatically during the 20th century through selecting desirable traits. Going in and modifying the genes directly? Same thing, but faster.
That said, some of the business practices that are associated with GM foods disturb me greatly, but these aren’t restricted to GM foods alone: Witness, for example, the corn strains where you can’t save a few ears and use the seeds for next year’s crop. Or the use of patents to limit farmer’s use of seed stock or confiscate accidentally cross-polinated plants. It’s a real problem, but alas doesn’t make as sexy and pithy a bumper sticker.
Comment by don hosek — January 24, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
btw, I’m puzzled by the football comment
Comment by don hosek — January 24, 2007 @ 3:55 pm
do you know what happened to EWG?
gone bust or just server offline?
http://www.ewg.org/
Comment by Johan — January 25, 2007 @ 2:48 am
probably just a glitch now its back online again
which also led me to http://www.safecosmetics.org/
Comment by Johan — January 25, 2007 @ 10:53 am
Ah you really should have done physics it is just so much fun. also when you tell people you are doing a phd in physics they always look expressed. When it is easier then people think.
Intelligent design is stupid. Put it this way. If a god designed us why would we be able to swallow food the wrong way.?
As for GM food. I am with Don on that.
here is one of the most interesting bits of science I read in the last while http://dossing.blogspot.com/2007/01/water.html
Comment by simon — January 25, 2007 @ 4:46 pm
should be impressed not expressed. See I am lucky I did not do humanities :)
Comment by simon — January 25, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
Re football: Reading over it, I too am confused.
What I meant: I wanna go out of my way to try new things, but this category of “new things” doesn’t include stuff like sports — i.e. football — which I still don’t give a shit about.
I don’t blame you for not getting that train of thought, don :P
simon — But do those impressed by physicists look as impressed when you say you write poetry? :)
I hear both of you with the GM food issue, but don’t you agree that if Americans are eating the stuff, they at least deserve to know that they ARE eating GM foods? It seems most are firmly kept in the dark.
This point is not clear in my original post, but I think that people should be given full knowledge of what they are ingesting, whether or not the official govt. thinks that’s ok or healthy or not….
Comment by Siel — January 26, 2007 @ 12:54 am
Well yes maybe it should be labelled as GM. But there is alot of disinformation about it out there. People think GM crops will cause you to mutate (a wee exaggeration but you get my point) and other ludicrous ideas. When in fact as Don said the for and against reason are far more subtle then that.
People will only use labelling information if they know what it means. While if people make decisions based on ignorance it can actually detrimental.
Basically if you give people information you have to educate people about what the information actually means. Simply saying this has GM does not work when all people hear about GM is corporations saying it is greatest thing since sliced bread and some green lobbies saying it is Frankenstein food when the truth is something murky in the middle.
But do those impressed by physicists look as impressed when you say you write poetry? :)
I don’t know I have been asked to explain the theory of relativity by women in night clubs a few times but never the use of pathetic fallacy in 18th century French poetry. :)
Comment by simon — January 26, 2007 @ 2:05 am
RE: GM food.
If you wanna know more about who has benefitted from GM plants in agriculture a recent FOE report should be an eye opener
http://www.foei.org/media/2007/0109.html
Comment by Johan — January 26, 2007 @ 2:12 am
So we need a label, and we need to work on education about GM. It’s not an either or issue.
Thanks for the link, Johan :)
Comment by Siel — January 26, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
Basically yes.
Comment by simon — January 27, 2007 @ 4:42 pm