On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 15:03:41 GMT, "" wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 15:24:00 +0100, Victoria Clare
wrote:

When they invent a strawberry-flavoured GM swede that cures the common cold
and will grow only in Norfolk, then I shall be all for it, but 'slightly
better maize'? Hardly a warcry, is it?

If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.
--
Martin

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

snip

Peer review is about deciding whether an idea should become a part of
the
body of scientific knowledge, not whether it's good or bad for
society.
Some scientists really do have very strange ideas about their
importance.


Peer review is about deciding whether an article should be published in
a
'reputable' journal. That's important to people whose careers depend on
producing a flow of such published articles.


Sure, and once published whether or not others reference it will depend on
many things, but once published it becomes possible. There are also the
trainspotting style - citation counters, who believe that if more peer
reviewed papers support some theory than refute it then that is also a
measure of something worthwhile

Not in my field.

- it probably isn't. Whatever the case,
peer reviewed science isn't the start (or end) of anything very much as
far
as technology is concerned.

Franz

"Victoria Clare" wrote in message
. 222...
martin wrote in
:

But we produce newly genetically modified potatoes every year or so
and have done so since time immemorial..

My neighbour even won a large prize for doing this.


Well yes OK.

But those modifications are not designed specifically to allow him to
chuck
on piles of stuff that is damaging to the surrounding area, nor does he
interbreed his potatoes with, say, gerbils.

I am prepared to believe those that know more about it than me, that no
harm would come, at least of the latter, and indeed that the area will
probably manage to bounce back from the former too, over time.

But as there seem to be ample test areas for checking this sort of thing
elsewhere, I still don't see why they need to be done here and now.

When they invent a strawberry-flavoured GM swede that cures the common
cold
and will grow only in Norfolk, then I shall be all for it, but 'slightly
better maize'? Hardly a warcry, is it?

Yes it is worth a warcry. It might feed an additional million Africans, for
example.

Franz

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 17:51:38 +0200, martin wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 15:03:41 GMT, "" wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 15:24:00 +0100, Victoria Clare
wrote:

When they invent a strawberry-flavoured GM swede that cures the common cold
and will grow only in Norfolk, then I shall be all for it, but 'slightly
better maize'? Hardly a warcry, is it?

If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.

I try not to.



. . . . . . . .





The facts expressed here belong to everybody,
the opinions to me.
The distinction is yours to draw...

/( )`
\ \___ / |
/- _ `-/ '
(/\/ \ \ /\
/ / | ` \
O O ) / |
`-^--'` '
(_.) _ ) /
`.___/` /
`-----' /
----. __ / __ \
----|====O)))==) \) /====
----' `--' `.__,' \
| |
\ /
______( (_ / \______
,' ,-----' | \
`--{__________) \/

I'm a horny devil when riled.


pete who?

-=[ Grim Reaper ]=- 6/97

.""--.._
[] `'--.._
||__ `'-,
`)||_ ```'--.. \
_ /|//} ``--._ |
.'` `'. /////} `\/
/ .""".\ //{///
/ /_ _`\\ // `||
| |(_)(_)|| _// ||
| | /\ )| _///\ ||
| |L====J | / |/ | ||
/ /'-..-' / .'` \ | ||
/ | :: | |_.-` | \ ||
/| `\-::.| | \ | ||
/` `| / | | | / ||
|` \ | / / \ | ||
| `\_| |/ ,.__. \ | ||
/ /` `\ || ||
| . / \|| ||
| | |/ ||
/ / | ( ||
/ . / ) ||
| \ | ||
/ | / ||
|\ / | ||
\ `-._ | / ||
\ ,//`\ /` | ||
///\ \ | \ ||
|||| ) |__/ | ||
|||| `.( | ||
`\\` /` / ||
/` / ||
jgs / | ||
| \ ||
/ | ||
/` \ ||
/` | ||
`-.___,-. .-. ___,' ||
`---'` `'----'`
I need a drink, feel all giddy...hic!

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:49:41 GMT, "" wrote:


If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.

I try not to.

Your description fitted most green house crops GM or no GM.
--
Martin

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 19:52:31 +0200, martin wrote:

On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:49:41 GMT, "" wrote:


If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.

I try not to.

Your description fitted most green house crops GM or no GM.

Does it?
. . . . . . . .





The facts expressed here belong to everybody,
the opinions to me.
The distinction is yours to draw...

/( )`
\ \___ / |
/- _ `-/ '
(/\/ \ \ /\
/ / | ` \
O O ) / |
`-^--'` '
(_.) _ ) /
`.___/` /
`-----' /
----. __ / __ \
----|====O)))==) \) /====
----' `--' `.__,' \
| |
\ /
______( (_ / \______
,' ,-----' | \
`--{__________) \/

I'm a horny devil when riled.


pete who?

-=[ Grim Reaper ]=- 6/97

.""--.._
[] `'--.._
||__ `'-,
`)||_ ```'--.. \
_ /|//} ``--._ |
.'` `'. /////} `\/
/ .""".\ //{///
/ /_ _`\\ // `||
| |(_)(_)|| _// ||
| | /\ )| _///\ ||
| |L====J | / |/ | ||
/ /'-..-' / .'` \ | ||
/ | :: | |_.-` | \ ||
/| `\-::.| | \ | ||
/` `| / | | | / ||
|` \ | / / \ | ||
| `\_| |/ ,.__. \ | ||
/ /` `\ || ||
| . / \|| ||
| | |/ ||
/ / | ( ||
/ . / ) ||
| \ | ||
/ | / ||
|\ / | ||
\ `-._ | / ||
\ ,//`\ /` | ||
///\ \ | \ ||
|||| ) |__/ | ||
|||| `.( | ||
`\\` /` / ||
/` / ||
jgs / | ||
| \ ||
/ | ||
/` \ ||
/` | ||
`-.___,-. .-. ___,' ||
`---'` `'----'`
I need a drink, feel all giddy...hic!

In article , Michael Saunby
writes

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

snip

Peer review is about deciding whether an idea should become a part of
the
body of scientific knowledge, not whether it's good or bad for society.
Some scientists really do have very strange ideas about their
importance.


Peer review is about deciding whether an article should be published in a
'reputable' journal. That's important to people whose careers depend on
producing a flow of such published articles.


Sure, and once published whether or not others reference it will depend on
many things, but once published it becomes possible. There are also the
trainspotting style - citation counters, who believe that if more peer
reviewed papers support some theory than refute it then that is also a
measure of something worthwhile - it probably isn't. Whatever the case,
peer reviewed science isn't the start (or end) of anything very much as far
as technology is concerned.

Peer review is also (or should be) about looking for flaws in the
methodology etc. of the study - passing peer review doesn't mean an
article is worth-while, but failing it usually means it's a pile of
dodgy tosh.


--
Surfer!
If you really want to send me email then use:
five_cats
at uk2 dot net

The message
from martin contains these words:

I can't say if gerbils were involved. Although mayonnaise flavoured
bintje shaped ferral gerbils have been spotted in the Haarlemermeer
polder.

Is a ferral gerbil a rodent-on-a-stick?

--
Rusty Hinge
horrid·squeak&zetnet·co·uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/tqt.htm

The message m
from "" contains these words:

If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

But that's probably because the greedy hooters modified something like
Monemaker.

--
Rusty Hinge
horrid·squeak&zetnet·co·uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/tqt.htm

The message
from martin contains these words:
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:49:41 GMT, "" wrote:

If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.

I try not to.

Your description fitted most green house crops GM or no GM.

I'm glad you said 'most'. On my smallholding I used to grow Ailsa Craig,
Shirley and Alicante in a big greenhouse and sell them at the gate.

Soil in the greenhouse was prepared in the autumn with rabbit and goat
manure and vegetable compost, and the tomatoes grown on it were
snapped-up by those who got to know about them, because they had applied
no artificial sprays or fertilisers, but more than that, they had superb
flavour.

Likewise my soft fruit went like wildfire for the same reasons.

--
Rusty Hinge
horrid·squeak&zetnet·co·uk
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hi-fi/tqt.htm

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 20:23:19 +0100, Jaques d'Altrades
wrote:

The message
from martin contains these words:

I can't say if gerbils were involved. Although mayonnaise flavoured
bintje shaped ferral gerbils have been spotted in the Haarlemermeer
polder.

Is a ferral gerbil a rodent-on-a-stick?

with chips.....
--
Martin

On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 20:31:47 +0100, Jaques d'Altrades
wrote:

The message
from martin contains these words:
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 16:49:41 GMT, "" wrote:

If the GM tomatoes are anything to go by, it'll look great, feel
great, grow really well, but be completely tasteless anyway.
. . . . . . . .

Don't confuse GM with greenhouse products.

I try not to.

Your description fitted most green house crops GM or no GM.

I'm glad you said 'most'. On my smallholding I used to grow Ailsa Craig,
Shirley and Alicante in a big greenhouse and sell them at the gate.

Soil in the greenhouse was prepared in the autumn with rabbit and goat
manure and vegetable compost, and the tomatoes grown on it were
snapped-up by those who got to know about them, because they had applied
no artificial sprays or fertilisers, but more than that, they had superb
flavour.

Likewise my soft fruit went like wildfire for the same reasons.

I meant the stuff imported from the Netherlands and on sale in most UK
supermarkets.
--
Martin

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

snip

Peer review is about deciding whether an idea should become a part
of
the
body of scientific knowledge, not whether it's good or bad for
society.
Some scientists really do have very strange ideas about their
importance.


Peer review is about deciding whether an article should be published
in
a
'reputable' journal. That's important to people whose careers depend
on
producing a flow of such published articles.


Sure, and once published whether or not others reference it will depend
on
many things, but once published it becomes possible. There are also the
trainspotting style - citation counters, who believe that if more peer
reviewed papers support some theory than refute it then that is also a
measure of something worthwhile

Not in my field.

Your field appears to be full of cabbages.

"Franz Heymann" wrote in
:

When they invent a strawberry-flavoured GM swede that cures the
common
cold
and will grow only in Norfolk, then I shall be all for it, but
'slightly better maize'? Hardly a warcry, is it?

Yes it is worth a warcry. It might feed an additional million
Africans, for example.


If you believe that famines are caused by simple lack of food on the global
market, and that the UK can and will grow more food that will be used for
that purpose in this way, then I can see that view is logical.

I don't believe that myself, but each to their own.

Victoria

"Five Cats" wrote in message
...
In article , Michael Saunby
writes

"BAC" wrote in message
...

"Michael Saunby" wrote in message
...

snip

Peer review is about deciding whether an idea should become a part of
the
body of scientific knowledge, not whether it's good or bad for
society.
Some scientists really do have very strange ideas about their
importance.


Peer review is about deciding whether an article should be published in
a
'reputable' journal. That's important to people whose careers depend on
producing a flow of such published articles.


Sure, and once published whether or not others reference it will depend
on
many things, but once published it becomes possible. There are also the
trainspotting style - citation counters, who believe that if more peer
reviewed papers support some theory than refute it then that is also a
measure of something worthwhile - it probably isn't. Whatever the case,
peer reviewed science isn't the start (or end) of anything very much as
far
as technology is concerned.

Peer review is also (or should be) about looking for flaws in the
methodology etc. of the study - passing peer review doesn't mean an
article is worth-while, but failing it usually means it's a pile of
dodgy tosh.


Or perhaps that some score settling is being done.