JIC scientists' anger at Prince's comments
2.JIC scientists' anger at Prince's GM comments
3.GM crops: Here's a health unto His Future Majesty
EXTRACTS: Prince Charles' concerns over GM food are well-founded. Current genetics' methodologies are far from rigorous science and are more aligned to educated (albeit improving) guesswork... In a nutshell, the world is potentially a hundred years from a rigorous understanding of genetics and, critically, in the hands of biologists, we are now on the brink of devastating much of the earth's natural genetic pool through ignorance.
- Kevin Nolan, Institute of Technology, Dublin, 14 Aug 2008 (item 1)
It does not seem to have occurred to these strident critics that... unlike the innumerable special pleaders on this issue - he disinterestedly desires the security of the nation, not profits from mega corporations manipulating nature on the suck-it-and-see principle.
...giant corporations... are ruthlessly cornering the world's food market. Have we learned nothing from the hunger now being suffered by tens of millions as a consequence of biofuels production?
- Gerald Warner, The Telegraph, 13 August 2008, (item 3)
1.Prince Charles, science and global hunger
The Guardian (Letters), August 14 2008
Prince Charles' concerns over GM food are well-founded. Current genetics' methodologies are far from rigorous science and are more aligned to educated (albeit improving) guesswork.
Most of genetic science is driven by those from the biological sciences. Hence, with a failure of the biology science world to police the application of such crude science practices, a world debate must be engaged that questions the quality of genetics as a true science.
In a nutshell, the world is potentially a hundred years from a rigorous understanding of genetics and, critically, in the hands of biologists, we are now on the brink of devastating much of the earth's natural genetic pool through ignorance.
Physicist, Institute of Technology, Tallaght, Dublin
2.Scientists' anger at Prince's GM comments
Eastern Daily Press, 14 August 2008
Leading Norfolk scientists last night hit back at the Prince of Wales for his attack against genetically-modified crops, branding his outburst “shocking and ill-informed”.
And experts at the John Innes Centre [JIC] in Colney [the leading research institute for GM plants in the UK with a history of big industry links and funding], Norwich, now want the prince to visit their laboratories so they can answer his questions and address his concerns.
Prof Alison Smith, research group leader at the centre, who was made an OBE for her services to plant biochemistry, accused Prince Charles of abusing his role and said he should have used it to launch a debate into the issue instead of making “unhelpful” remarks.
She said: “I was really quite shocked and saddened by what the prince had to say. It was really rather ill-informed and very negative.
“And I'm saddened that the Prince of Wales, who is in a leadership role and able to solve some of the problems he identifies - by bringing scientists, technicians and agricultural and climate change experts together - instead tried to blame the problems of the planet on a technology he clearly does not understand.
“He has a lot of understandable concerns about the way the planet is going but it would be good to see him looking broadly and objectively at how those concerns can be addressed and leading a constructive debate rather than dismiss something out of hand that we need to keep the door open on.”
Prince Charles drew criticism with his outspoken attack on industrial farming, warning genetically- modified food could be the “biggest disaster environmentally of all time”.
He said millions of small farmers around the world could be driven off their land into “degraded and dysfunctional conurbations of unmentionable awfulness” by the rise of global conglomerates.
The heir to the throne is a long-term supporter of sustainability and locally-produced food and often speaks out on environmental issues.
He has an organic farm on his Highgrove estate in Gloucestershire and set up the Duchy Originals brand, which sells exclusively organic produce, in 1990.
Prof Smith said: “GM is not a silver bullet but it is one of many things we need to look at to produce sustainable crops in the future. Obviously we have to take cautious, rational decisions in developing that technology.”
She claimed that, converse to the prince's comments, GM could be beneficial as global warming increases and crops become unsustainable in the rapidly changing climate.
“Crops at the moment are not going to sustain themselves in this time of unprecedented change. We need to have crops which can survive and will have less impact on the environment.”
Farmer William Brigham, of Lyng, near Dereham, whose GM trial crops were destroyed by Greenpeace protesters in the late 1990s, said the prince's comments were “condescending” to farmers who were “really astute businessmen who would not have anything foisted upon them”. He added: “I think it is extremely short-sighted to blame GM crops for everything that is going on in the world as far as the environment is concerned.”
3.GM crops: Here's a health unto His Future Majesty
The Telegraph, 13 August 2008
God bless the Prince of Wales. The abuse being heaped on him by the acolytes of genetically engineered food reflects the rage of the Nomenklatura at having its received wisdom challenged by somebody who commands public attention.
The evidence against GM food production is overwhelming
The party line is: what can this polo-playing grand seigneur know about the brave new world of genetically modified agriculture, compared to, say, a Labour MP sponsored by the National Union of Widget Makers, a bloke who subscribes to Nerds' Monthly, or Mr Angry from Tooting who believes that Progress is inevitable and crowned heads do not feature largely in that Orwellian landscape? Apparently "Luddite" is now a term of disparagement on the Left.
It does not seem to have occurred to these strident critics that HRH has spent half his life discussing these issues with leading scientists and agriculturalists, that papers daily cross his desk as authoritative as anything on Gordon Brown's and that - unlike the innumerable special pleaders on this issue - he disinterestedly desires the security of the nation, not profits from mega corporations manipulating nature on the suck-it-and-see principle.
The evidence against GM food production is overwhelming. The profiteers are proceeding with no sense of responsibility. As long ago as 2004 a report from the House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee warned that more than two-thirds of conventional crops in the United States are contaminated with genetically modified material. Why did the "trials" even in this country take place in open fields, from which the wind and insects would spread contamination? Because that is what the big corporations and the Government wanted to happen: to end opposition by presenting the public with a fait accompli.
Royalty has dared to challenge the New Order - the Scientocracy - and the white-coat arrogance of the new priesthood knows no bounds, whether it is colliding particles at CERN or polluting the global food supply. For these know-alls who cannot cure the common cold, the Earth is theirs and the fullness thereof.
Where are all the Elfin Safety [Health & Safety] control freaks now? Note, too, how "progressives" who normally exhibit a knee-jerk hostility to big business are suddenly supportive of the giant corporations that are ruthlessly cornering the world's food market. Have we learned nothing from the hunger now being suffered by tens of millions as a consequence of biofuels production?
The Prince had a broader agenda than scientific objections to GM production, important though that is: he recognised the cultural degradation that will overtake humanity if farmers no longer exist at a non-industrial level and the whole of mankind is herded into cities to work in call centres. If there was a minimal case for republicanism 24 hours ago, it has evaporated now.