Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #121   Report Post  
Old 03-10-2003, 12:15 PM
Jaques d'Altrades
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London

The message
from martin contains these words:

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.


You didn't make that very clear......

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

  #122   Report Post  
Old 04-10-2003, 12:01 AM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London


"BAC" wrote in message
...

"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.


Not in my field

Franz




  #123   Report Post  
Old 04-10-2003, 12:05 AM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London


"BAC" wrote in message
...

"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.


Not in my field

Franz




  #124   Report Post  
Old 04-10-2003, 01:46 AM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London


"BAC" wrote in message
...

"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.


Not in my field

Franz




  #125   Report Post  
Old 04-10-2003, 01:47 AM
Franz Heymann
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London


"BAC" wrote in message
...

"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.


Not in my field

Franz






  #126   Report Post  
Old 04-10-2003, 12:13 PM
martin
 
Posts: n/a
Default say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th October 2003 London

On Fri, 3 Oct 2003 11:39:28 +0100, Jaques d'Altrades
wrote:

The message
from martin contains these words:

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.


You didn't make that very clear......


I have now ..........
--
Martin


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
say non to GM - Join the Tractors & Trolley Parade - Monday 13th bigboard United Kingdom 5 02-10-2003 11:45 AM
[IBC] BONSAI Digest - 19 Jul 2003 to 20 Jul 2003 (#2003-202) [email protected] Bonsai 2 22-07-2003 06:32 AM
[IBC] BONSAI Digest - 8 Jun 2003 to 9 Jun 2003 (#2003-161) Gerald Laabs Bonsai 0 11-06-2003 12:44 AM
[IBC] BONSAI Digest - 27 May 2003 to 28 May 2003 (#2003-149) Gerald Laabs Bonsai 0 29-05-2003 09:08 PM
[IBC] BONSAI Digest - 15 May 2003 to 16 May 2003 (#2003-137) Jim Stone Bonsai 1 18-05-2003 08:08 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:32 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2020 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017