- What do you think of the latest Obama’s science appointments?
- Who else would you like to see step in to the remaining coveted appointments?

Again and again, with the hope that this takes roots:

Since the 1920s technology development has been THE TOOL of capital formation.
“Implications Of Science And Technology Evolution”
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q–?cq=1&p=419

Since the 1920s technology development has been THE TOOL of capital formation and accumulation, together with their inherent social and societal values, attitudes and life style and even together with their inherent individual and societal-social ethics.

The technology culture has been corrupting the status of science and has relegated science, the banner and hope of human enlightenment and rational evolution, to the file of quaint items. This process has been and is being perpetrated with the dedicated cooperation of the politically entrenched Science Establishment.

As long as Science and Technologhy are considered and handled, conceptually and administratively, as one realm and one faculty this corruption cannot and will not be overcome. This conception and attitude is THE CORRUPTION OF SCIENCE BY THE 21st CENTURY TECHNOLOGY CULTURE.

I note, with diappointment, acclaim of Obama’s picks of AAAS personalities. This, for me, is a reason for sad apprehension. There better be other reasons for the acclaim since AAAS, Science’s Establishment Guild, is one of the major perpetrators of the corruption of science by the 21st century technology culture.

Dov Henis

(Comments From The 22nd Century)
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q–?cq=1

A. Science Reporting Fallout
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/39060/title/Science_Reporting_Fallout
Newspaper cutbacks are being linked to diminished science reporting.

- Baltimore Sun: ” a quick update to yesterday’s story about the epidemic downsizing of U.S. newspaper staffs”…

- Doing ‘more with less’ has degenerated to doing less with less. Science and environment stories are often shortened substantially to meet with tightening space constraints, or they don’t make it into print at all.

- No matter how you spin it, that can’t be good for ensuring an informed electorate. What’s more, you know that with the deep job cuts occurring in newsrooms across the country, the Sun’s approach can hardly be unique…

B. CNN downsizes science team
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/39025/title/CNN_downsizes_science_team
The move and timing for greatly restructuring science-and-environment coverage at the nation’s all-news cable giant are perplexing.

According to a prepared statement issued by the network, “We want to integrate environmental, science and technology reporting into the general editorial structure rather than have a stand alone unit. Now that the bulk of our environmental coverage is being offered through the Planet in Peril franchise . . . there is no need for a separate unit.”

C. Since the 1920s technology development has been THE TOOL of capital formation

“Implications Of Science And Technology Evolution”
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q–?cq=1&p=419

Since the 1920s technology development has been THE TOOL of capital formation and accumulation, together with their inherent social and societal values, attitudes and life style and even together with their inherent individual and societal-social ethics.

The technology culture has been corrupting the status of science and has relegated science, the banner and hope of human enlightenment and rational evolution, to the file of quaint items. This process has been and is being perpetrated with the dedicated cooperation of the politically entrenched Science Establishment.

As long as Science and Technologhy are considered and handled, conceptually and administratively, as one realm and one faculty this corruption cannot and will not be overcome. This conception and attitude is THE CORRUPTION OF SCIENCE BY THE 21st CENTURY TECHNOLOGY CULTURE.

Dov Henis

(A DH Comment From The 22nd Century)
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q–?cq=1

Science Creed Manifest (SCM)
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q–?cq=1&p=142

Surely if more of us were involved at least to some degree in growing some of our own food the whole equation is changed from how to feed 9 billion people but to look at how to enable them to feed themselves. I’m not saying we should all grow all of our own food but we have developed a society where most people have no involvement in the process at any stage.

By becoming particpants we could dramatically increase food production and at the same time increase respect for the process and substantially reduce food and packaging waste.

Had a quick look, it does appear to say that BT-GM has *reduced* pesticide usage, whilst HT-GM has increased. I seem to recall Jimmy’s programme was mostly about BT-GM, so the discrepancies fit.

For me it also came across as very pro-GM, and the issues of monoculture and the ensuing fertiliser use was not brought up at all in the programme. I was very disappointed that the Soil Association spokesman didn’t put such views across.

One of the programme’s points did appear very convincing; If GM crops are bred to be resistant to (particular) pests, then they would require less use of pesticides. Yet the claim from Matthews is the direct opposite. Where is the research to back Matthews’ opinion?

As UK government ministers try once more to smooth the way for the entry of GM crops into the UK and Europe, Horizon, BBC television’s flagship science series, broadcast a programme that pretended to be a balanced look at GM. In fact, it was an advertisement for the GM industry. Fronted by the friendly face of farming, Jimmy Doherty, the programme managed to ignore all the problems and risks of GM while citing discredited promotional claims from the GM industry (GM means less pesticides, GM will feed the world) as fact. On the other hand, doubts about GM were twisted to sound unscientific and irrational and were immediately countered by yet another industry line of spin. GM Freeze warned the BBC in advance about the inaccuracies the and lack of balance in the programme.

Jonathan Matthews’s review for The Ecologist of Jimmy’s GM Food Fight:
http://www.theecologist.org:80/pages/archive_detail.asp?content_id=2003

I wonder what peoples’ thoughts are on Jimmy Doherty’s recent programme about GM:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00fsxq6/Horizon_Jimmys_GM_Food_Fight/

I was at both the Soil Association conference and the Transition conference (in fact, inspired by your presentation at the former to attend the latter). Events with different formats, but great work being done by great people at both. Inspiring and energising.