AN ORGANIC FARMER AND A GENETICIST WALK INTO A FIELD

For Pamela Ronald and Raoul Adamchak, genetic engineering and organic farming are both legitimate tools for pursuing sustainable agriculture.
http://ensia.com/articles/an-organic-farmer-and-a-geneticist-walk-into-a-field/

"The debate around genetically engineered crops and organic farming usually begins well beyond a point of no return. Heels dug in, opposing sides accuse one another of being anti-environment or anti-science, evil or ignorant. From there, what takes place is something closer to a schoolyard shouting match than adult discourse.

This is not usually a good — or very successful — place to start honest discussions looking to move conversations forward.

And it’s not the starting point for Pamela Ronald, a University of California, Davis, plant geneticist, and Raoul Adamchak, a farmer who runs the student organic farm on campus. The two are co-authors of Tomorrow’s Table: Organic Farming, Genetics, and the Future of Food. They are also married — a truly odd couple in a world divided by preconceived notions and decisions before discussions.

Debates pitting genetic engineering against organic agriculture, focus on, among other things, what each camp feels is necessary to feed a growing population. Both claim to have science on their side when it comes to producing the amount of food needed in a way that will do the least harm to the environment. But, where others see opposition, Ronald and Adamchak contend the two practices should be used in tandem toward the goal of sustainable agriculture.

..."

A great introduction, and I can't recommend their book enough.

7 replies, 1390 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

7 replies	Author	Time	Post
AN ORGANIC FARMER AND A GENETICIST WALK INTO A FIELD (Original post)	HuckleB	Sep 2013	OP
Kick.	HuckleB	Sep 2013	#1
Yeah, I'm kicking this again.	HuckleB	Sep 2013	#2
Okay, I'll kick it too.	hunter	Sep 2013	#3
That's possible.	HuckleB	Sep 2013	#5
"Genetically modifier? I don't even know her."	NuclearDem	Sep 2013	#4
OK, then.	HuckleB	Sep 2013	#6
Buddhist Economics and A GMO rethink by Pamela Ronald	HuckleB	Sep 2013	#7

Response to HuckleB (Original post)

Thu Sep 12, 2013, 03:33 PM

HuckleB (35,773 posts)

1. Kick.

Reply to this post

Response to HuckleB (Original post)

Thu Sep 12, 2013, 08:16 PM

HuckleB (35,773 posts)

2. Yeah, I'm kicking this again.

It's time to stop the anti-science routine. It hurts us all. Please dig in.

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Response to HuckleB (Original post)

Thu Sep 12, 2013, 08:27 PM

hunter (36,398 posts)

3. Okay, I'll kick it too.

But where's the evolutionary biologist?

Feeding people is not the problem. The problem is there are so many of us and we are clueless, simply following the same biological imperative of any innovative species: Exponential growth until you hit the ceiling.

Some species hit the ceiling softly, some hit hard.

I think ours will hit hard.

Reply to this post

Response to hunter (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 12, 2013, 08:34 PM

HuckleB (35,773 posts)

5. That's possible.

I'd suspect otherwise, however, if we can make it through the next few centuries. I'm much more worried about fundamentalism (of any kind) as a threat, at this point.

Reply to this post

Response to HuckleB (Original post)

Thu Sep 12, 2013, 08:31 PM

NuclearDem (16,184 posts)