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?


Isabelle said...

I would be willing to bet there are potential whistleblowers working right now for Monsanto ... just like there are/were for Philip Morris and the FBI. There is nothing wrong with providing information that causes people to question what they believe. We've been trained to be passive consumers of "infotainment" but there are some of us who are paying attention. I try to lead by example ... that means doing what I can to be informed and talking about it with anyone who will listen. Keep on posting!

Mr. H said...

We must accentuate the absolute and total absurdity of scientism. How do we do it? Unlike them, we must tell the truth over and over again and hope it sinks in. I'm jaded, I think most people do not care...but it is still my moral obligation to try anyway.

I, for one, will continue to tell anyone that will listen about what is really going on in this world. Your blog is a service to all, and I hope that you can not only get people to listen but also understand...and care.


ChristyACB said...

Very interesting that you've had Monsanto here ::waves to Monsanto:: or, maybe even, someone in Monsanto who is uneasy about what they do. That would be a good thing!

As a scientist myself, I do know that science covers so much and has given us so many gifts in our lives, I understand what can drive far reaching experimentation. What I don't understand is putting such into the food chain without really understanding the effects over the long term. I don't want transgenic food and I shouldn't be forced to deal with it and no one else should either if they choose not to.

Keep up the good work!

anne said...

I spend half my time thinking you're right Mike, that people have just given up and don't care...but then I'm met frequently with people who have really changed their thinking. I do think that ignorance is groomed - and feel too a moral obligation to see thru, and mess that up as best I can.

anne said...

What a great hunch Isabelle. Monsanto whistleblowers, please write!