Because for some reason the bulletin board program this forum is using - tagged it as a Moderated Post and one of the Staff had to approve it. Is it still missing? I do not have a notification telling me it is still waiting for approval.
Its there, thank you. Sorry, I'm new at this.
We are are humans, even scientists and genius'. I have great respect for the scientific method, but I have come to terms that 'science' and scientists are fallible and human. Our perception is always subjective, never completely objective or holistic, and as you already stated, the game today is all about the money. Unfortunately science is not immune or insulated from this effect, afterall someone needs to fund research, most often for a profitable cause. Unfortuantely many people can be bought, although there are a few that will never compromise their integrity and care simply about truth and knowlege.
I basically agree with all you've said here. Science is definitely not infallible. The good thing about science however, is that if you follow the scientific method, your results are entirely unbiased. If they are biased, it will most certainly turn up in peer review. As far as science being corrupted by money, I cannot deny this, but I do not think ceasing progress is the answer. The problem is what people don't understand, scares them. Thus we get art (i.e. documentaries), religion, etc in an attempt to better understand the world. We know why certain GMO's are causing ecological problems. Its not a mystery to people in the industry and it could be fixed with science. But that would not be financially beneficial, at least not MORE beneficial than what they are currently doing.
Although I disagree with many tenants in naturopathy, including that you can avoid all sickness (much sickness, yes!) with proper diet, I certainly respect your view, and would certainly give any experiment you've done credibility. Thats the great thing about science, is that with the introduction of new evidence, my opinions can change, unlike when people have a "feeling" or a "belief"
Do you think its possible for GMO to be grown in a completely isolated way so it would not interrupt biodiversity? (Just assuming that people can stop being greedy)
Yes. There are however, always unknowns. There will always be something that was missed. However, there is always corrective action that can be taken. Just look at the history of chirality in the pharmaceutical industry. Science caused death because of something that was overlooked. That problem now NEVER arises through that mechanism. But then again, it was financially beneficial to correct THAT problem. Chiral drugs have saved millions and killed a few hundred (in the beginning. They kill 0 today, but are still saving millions). Its an unfortunate learning curve for the greater good.
It is a shame that our current society is so reliant on intellectual property. I believe that science would flourish in a society without intellectual property. I want open source science. I dont think that things will stay this way forever, inevitably, eventually we will evolve, and creater better, efficient and more functional societies.
We're on the same page in this respect
Anytime (and I do mean ANYTIME) you take something that doesn't naturally occur or exist in a certain from, and create a situation where we have to live with it, life suffers. Fossil fuels buried in the earth for millions of years get dug up and burned = greenhouse gasses and carcinogens being pumped into the atmosphere. Strip mines, uranium mining, oil shale mining, etc remove thousands of tons of "waste" from safely underground and then let it sit, exposed to our atmosphere and seep into the water table (which it was safely hidden beneath before being disturbed).
Yes. Animals have done this throughout history. They thrive, as a result, their food supply shortens, or possibly goes extinct, and if they are not able to overcome this they too go extinct. Humans are FAR from the first species to significantly alter the ecology in which they live. For example, the reason that we have an atmosphere or ozone in the first place. If we don't change the way science is being implemented, things will turn out bad for us. But with science comes good as well.
Like it or not, you are a pawn. All of this science you dedicate yourself to is run 100% for political reasons. You might hate politics, but unless you fix that issue first, you'll get nowhere. In terms of your analogy, the government is the father and you're the 5 year old with the loaded weapon. You can either sit here and argue back and forth about how that little kid should handle the weapon, or you can go to the father and fix the problem from the source. The fact that you see this, yet you willingly commit yourself to continuing to be part of that problem is quite sad...
Given that your ideology is much more powerful than your practical knowledge on this topic (which as an INFJ is something I can understand) I will explain MY philosophies to you, since you are arguing philosophically rather than scientifically. However this will be my last response in this thread unless it is directly related to GMO.
Yes. I can be called a pawn. In fact ANYONE who has a job is a pawn. Even people who are self employed are pawns, they just may not have the depth to realize it. Your comment about fixing the politics literally made me LOL. You are clearly such an idealist that you don't understand the magnitude of what it would take to fix this system. Imperialism is imbedded so deep within the leadership of the world, that the ONLY thing that can stop it is a VIOLENT revolution. It CANNOT be changed within the law. They are the law. They are the judge, jury, executioner. So, your question boils down to why don't I start a violent revolution? The answer is I am too comfortable in life. My house sits on 20 acres (I have not mortgage), I have more than one car, more than one motorcycle, farming equipment, I have a greenhouse and a garden where I grow most of my own produce (Some of them with GM seeds! Gasp!), I raise my own poultry, I built a pond just last year where I raise and stock fish that I eat, I have a room full of firearms and ammunition (I'm an avid hunter. In fact thats the only meat that I eat with the exception of previously mentioned fish/poultry because of the fact that they put known carcinogens in our meat to maintain freshness). My house is rigged with solar panels and a large diesel generator. I can't remember the last time my electric bill was more than $15. I have well water, but a river runs through my property, so if I ever needed to, I could purify my own water. The point is, I rely on society much less than most people, and thats how I like it.
So I won't start a violent revolution, but I do however try to improve humanity. My neighbor is a mechanical/electrical engineer and has been my friend for about 20 years. Together we have built a home laboratory and do research that is completely self-funded. We are trying to develop more efficient water purification systems. We will probably never succeed on our budget, but given our resources have had great success. In the unlikely event we make an efficient, cost effective water purifier (for large scale systems) you can bet your ass we will be getting a patent lawyer. We do not have the resources to mass produce something like this, so it would need to be done by a company. However our patent stipulation would be that not a single person can profit from its sales. If it ever happens, you will most certainly hear about it. Any company that would do this means they justified the great expense as a great opportunity for positive PR. But then again, we are SO far from success. Its more of a hobby than a business.
Being such an idealist like your self is good, as long as you know where to draw the line between ideals and practicality. You evidently, do not. What do you do to fix the system other than talk about it? This is rhetorical of course.
Although I understand your analogy where I am a pawn, I disagree with it. I have more than a decade of research experience AFTER writing my PhD thesis. I have come a long way in the company I work at and in my general knowledge of biochemical processes. I supervise several laboratories. A pawn would imply I could be easily replaced by somebody else. Although I could most certainly be replaced, it would not be easy, like say, if I were the general manager of a retail store, a firefighter/policeman, a mailman, etc. That may not be a politically correct thing to say, but its the truth. During my time in the military, I acknowledged I was a mere pawn. I was ok with that. In my analogy, I would be more like a bishop, and jobs which were just mentioned would be pawns. If we are going to use your analogy however, than we need to invent a new concept in chess where there are prisoners. That is where the majority of the world would be, most likely including yourself.
You clearly misunderstood my analogy with the father and the gun. Scientists were the father because they know how to use the tool. The child, does not know how to use the tool.
I'm disappointed you feel scientists are part of the problem, because its fear like that that will ultimately hold society back.
