March 1, 2009
extrapolating on the factual; truth with emphasis?
In a world where truth is stretched out beyond focus whilst glittering excesses distract and immersion in "comforts" (BSTV, gambling or pornography) passify; How do we search for and communicate truth in this context? How do we reach out as far as we can to see what is real and what is happening now. For example, how do we survive and what effect that has on a micro (cellular, molecular) and macro (communal, national, global) scale. What is happening? How to communicate it.
I have a statcounter whereby I can watch who comes and how, and where they go. Its interesting that the Asians and Africans are into the implements (here and here) and that Monsanto is interested in beets to ethanol. Monsanto also sends it's public relations firm over - The Standing Partnership - and they go to the post on GMO alfalfa and the one on wheat. I love being able to communicate with African farmers. (Please write me!), and Monsanto's interest indicates they are threatened by our communicating. It makes them vulnerable. This is encouraging.
The advantage we have (those of us without PHD's in molecular biology, or inside seats on key corporate boardrooms) is the fact that NOBODY knows what the consequences of the blind manipulation of life will be. Transgenic contamination or nanoparticle/composite saturation or synthetic microbes: where is that taking us? Nobody can say. Precautionary Principle is to the wind. Scientific hypothesis is as good here as intuitive knowing. Its wide open, unknown - assurances are bold faced lies to pacify us. There is substantial propoganda occurring to ease in a transition to what many powerful people believe is the nestgen economy.
Within this context, is it fair play to emphasize, never lie, but accentuate the absurdity of scientism? To get through to some buffered, yet in essence good, people?
How do we do it?