Pope Francis can claim many firsts; he is the first non-European Pope since 741 AD, the first from the Americas and the first from the Southern Hemisphere. Given his nuanced positions on science issues like climate change and agriculture, some might also consider him the first scientific Pope. That isn't correct, but he may be the most scientific in history. Francis is not scientific due to credentialism, he does not have any advanced degree in chemistry. Instead, he is scientific by behavior.
ACSH friend and Fox News host John Stossel has penned a commentary bemoaning the current status of scientific discourse in America. We here at ACSH agree, sadly, with the main thrusts of his cri de coeur: fixed beliefs based on ideology are the opposite of science.
We have to give a shout-out to freelance science writer Kavin Senapathy for her interview on dnaindia.com. Senapathy eloquently conveys the facts on genetically modified food for the article: Organic vs GM: finding the grain of truth.
We have to give a shout-out to Levi Gadye over at io9.com for his informative article You Can Thank Genetic Engineering For Your Delicious Cheese. Unbeknown to most, GMOs are used to make about 80 to 90 percent of cheese
We wish we could say that an advanced academic degree leads one to respect scientific truth, but it ain t necessarily so. In a hard-hitting opinion piece in the Chicago Tribune, Ms. Erin Gallagher counters every point made by an anti-GMO professor (St. Xavier University assistant professor Tatiana C. Tatum Parker) in an earlier commentary. The Trib describes Ms. Gallagher as a freelance reporter for the Daily Southtown and a work-from-home mom with a small garden business. She is an active member of the Will County Farm Bureau and is on a volunteer advisory committee for the
An op-ed in Forbes.com by James Conca notes the benefits of nuclear power in helping to ameliorate, to some extent, the disastrous drought now gripping California (and to a lesser extent, Oregon and Washington). Specifically, he notes the nuclear reactor at Diablo
Yet another prominent anti-GMO advocate has come forward to publicly announce that he has reassessed his opinion on GMOs. Earlier this year, the co-founder of Greenpeace, Dr. Patrick Moore, did likewise, calling the campaign against genetic science baseless. Following shortly thereafter was Mark Lynas, who penned a New York Times op-ed titled How I Got Converted to GMO food this past
The NY Times has printed the truth about GMOs in Jane Brody s weekly column on health.
Here s a question for our Dispatch readers: When is a GMO not a GMO? A proper science answer would go something like this: all agriculture (and really all life) has been genetically modified at some point either by humans or another species (e.g. bacteria or virus) so therefore everything is a GMO.
Newsweek s recent cover story puts it bluntly: YOU ARE TOTALLY WRONG ABOUT GENETICALLY ALTERED FOOD. And author Tom Parrett eloquently explains why in his article: GMO Scientists Could Save the World From Hunger, If We Let Them.
Simply put: The March Against Monsanto (MAM) is a menace to society. It spreads lies and distrust about science and scientists. Its organizers frequently compare themselves to great American civil rights leaders like Rosa Parks and Dr. King. They say that they believe
Dr. Gilbert Ross in Science 2.0 The baseless, superstitious fear of chemicals has certainly gripped our supposedly advanced population in a haze of inchoate panic akin to the residents of 17th century Salem, or Europeans of the Dark Ages