Two Exciting New Science Blogs : Dispatches from the Culture Wars

Profile

Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of Michigan Citizens for Science and co-founder of The Panda's Thumb. He has written for such publications as The Bard, Skeptic and Reports of the National Center for Science Education, spoken in front of many organizations and conferences, and appeared on nationally syndicated radio shows and on C-SPAN. Ed is also a Fellow with the Center for Independent Media and the host of Declaring Independence, a one hour weekly political talk show on WPRR in Grand Rapids, Michigan.(static)

Search

Other Information

Ed Brayton also blogs at Positive Liberty and The Panda's Thumb

Ed Brayton is a participant in the Center for Independent Media New Journalism Program. However, all of the statements, opinions, policies, and views expressed on this site are solely Ed Brayton's. This web site is not a production of the Center, and the Center does not support or endorse any of the contents on this site.

Ed's Audio and Video

Declaring Independence podcast feed

YearlyKos 2007

Video of speech on Dover and the Future of the Anti-Evolution Movement

Audio of Greg Raymer Interview

E-mail Policy

Any and all emails that I receive may be reprinted, in part or in full, on this blog with attribution. If this is not acceptable to you, do not send me e-mail - especially if you're going to end up being embarrassed when it's printed publicly for all to see.

My Ecosystem Details

« Badass Quote of the Day | Main | Dumbass Quote of the Day »

Two Exciting New Science Blogs

Posted on: October 24, 2009 9:23 AM, by Ed Brayton

ScienceBlogs has added two new bloggers to the group and I personally find these additions very exciting because they write about subjects that fascinate me, evolution and food.

The first is Evolution for Everyone and the blogger is David Sloane Wilson. This one is right up my alley, as Wilson tends to write about how evolution interacts with religion and society in many interesting ways. He is one of the leading voices in the interesting field of evolutionary religious studies, the same subject in which my friend Gretchen, a frequent commenter here, has her PhD. This is definitely a blog to keep an eye on.

The second blog is Tomorrow's Table and the author is Pamela Ronald, a plant pathologist from UC-Davis. Her blog is about how science shapes the food we eat, particularly the use of genetic engineering to make crops that have higher yields, resistance to disease and so forth. In her second post she hits on the controversial topic of using genetically modified foods:

In 1905, Sir Rowland Biffen generated disease resistant wheat varieties, demonstrating for the first time that Mendel's laws of inheritance could be applied to plant breeding. Today most of the fruits and vegetables that we eat (including those certified organic) carry "natural" disease resistance genes. Without the use of genetically improved crop varieties we would have few ecologically-based tools to combat pests and diseases. The alternative is overuse of pesticides, many of which harm the environment and human health.
Does it take a 20% increase in the cost of heirloom tomato salad and commentary by a famous chef before science can be seen as a positive force for public good in the U.S.?

For some, this is apparently so. I hope this changes because without good science and good farming, we cannot even begin to dream about establishing an environmentally balanced, biologically based system of farming and ensuring food security.

This will be very interesting to watch as she takes on the anti-science left in much the same way that so many of us at ScienceBlogs take on the anti-science right.

Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

Comments

Ed - Dr. Wilson has already published a blog post I think is begging for analysis by you, it's titled: Goodbye HuffPost, Hello ScienceBlogs: Science as a Religion that Worships Truth as its God [sic] [bold font mine].

This post got enough critical commenters Dr. Wilson followed up with this attempt to defend that post. I responded @ 7 with to his follow-up with this rebuttal:

My concern about the sloppy use of such metaphors is the fact that too many public school children in this country are not properly educated in science and particularly evolution. Many school board members see science and religion as competing world views where they have an ethical and moral obligation to the Christian faith to insure they suppress certain aspects of science and promote religion to public school children. I know, I was one of these students.

I suggest Dr. Wilson read the Dover Trial transcripts or at least Laurie Lebo's book on the Dover Trial. Perhaps he wouldn't be so ready to provide ammunition to the very people who control many of the school boards throughout this country and one of only two political parties that rule our government. While it may be legal to teach evolution in the public schools, many schools continue to fall far short of adequately teaching it or encouraging and developing capable students to consider a career in the sciences.

Posted by: Michael Heath | October 24, 2009 9:41 AM

Ed:

I think your bloghead was a bit overly optimistic.

Posted by: democommie | October 25, 2009 12:15 AM

Hmm, I may have to argue about the GM food quote. I have not read the full article. However, GM foods have not been used to reduce pesticide usage or increase yields to help cure hunger. The most prominent example of successful, widespread GM food is Round Up Ready seeds. These plants are engineered to withstand more pesticide application, not less. And, they are created with suicide seeds, so the farmers cannot harvest seeds from their crop so replant. How does it increase yields to make suicide seeds? And, their plants have been tested and generally have lower yields, not higher ones.

Yes, there are benevolent possibilities with GM foods, but the current application of this technology is not as an "alternative" to the "overuse of pesticides."

Posted by: MomTFH | October 25, 2009 2:26 AM

MomTFH: The most common application of GM food would have been to prevent vitamin A deficiency in the third world, if Greenpeace hadn't protested against Golden Rice on purely ideological grounds.

Posted by: wazza | October 25, 2009 3:21 AM

Wazza, there are many effective ways to grow foods with beta carotene without adding them to rice. There a tons of ways for these companies to decrease death among children in developing countries that don't involve patenting the food staples they eat.

I still think I am correct about the current applications.

Posted by: MomTFH | October 25, 2009 10:01 AM

thanks you for introducing my blog. Indeed our interests overlap. I look forward to following your posts

Posted by: Pam Ronald | October 25, 2009 10:51 AM

MomTFH: However, GM foods have not been used to reduce pesticide usage or increase yields to help cure hunger.

Dear MomWTF: Please read up on Bt gene insertion into crop plants. Bt refers to a natural polypeptide insecticide from Bacillus thuringiensis, the gene for which has been inserted into a wide variety of plant crop species.
Also, RoundUp is one of the safest herbicides we have. Allowing use of RoundUp to kill weeds reduces the need for more toxic herbicides.

Posted by: Herod the Freemason | October 26, 2009 8:38 AM

Thanks for the cheap insult of messing with my handle. It doesn't really add any validity to your post, but you get extra points for immaturity.

Bt is available in a spray and has been used as an "organic" pesticide for years. It does not need to be incorporated into the plant genetics.

Secondly, introducing it into the genes of the plant may make it more likely for pests to become resistant, and that is already happening with transgenic Bt crops. Here is some pesky research confirming it. Funny how you think I haven't read about Bt.

Thirdly, the main crop it is used on transgenetically is cotton. Is that feeding the hungry?

And fourth, Round Up is still a pesticide. So, adding more Round Up is not decreasing pesticide usage. Which was my point. I never said it was the worst of all pesticides.

And, what about those crop yields? All of the evidence of the Round Up crops seem to show lower yields, and the link above about transgenic Bt crops talks about flat out crop failure.

I suppose when you are not going to directly address my points, or actually look up facts about what you're saying (while saying I am ill informed - irony much?), it is easier to make fun of my name.

Posted by: MomTFH | October 26, 2009 5:28 PM

Check out this series on GMOs by Bill Nye the Science Guy. There are three segments. It's a nice balanced view, and he addresses many of the same issues I brought up. (We all know how he's on the WTF bandwagon. Bill Nye that WTF guy, everyone calls him....eye roll)

Segment 2 discusses Round Up Ready, golden rice (very humorously) and Bt. He did not mention the suicide seeds or that major butterfly losses have been linked to GMO crops (although the rest of the scenario at the end of the 3rd episode has not occurred.)

Look, I never said it was all FrankenFood and we should run away screaming. I just think that, just like pharmaceutical companies, agrochemical companies need to be scrutinized carefully, and glorifying their intentions of saving the children is a little naive as they secure patents on staple crops all over the world.

Oh, and sarcacstically, inaccurately slamming anyone who has a little researched cynicism about these companies is just as unscientifically based as freaking out over every new technological advancement.

Posted by: MomTFH | October 27, 2009 12:29 PM

Sorry, this is the link to the correct video.

Posted by: MomTFH | October 27, 2009 2:10 PM