Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
Hi Peter Hi Keith ; I have made the point previously many times on-list that genetic engineering is not the answer to anything and in fact it will kill millions of people. This is one way. Could be. I don't altogether agree with you though, I don't think genetic engineering should be written off. Certainly there's nothing good about the current offerings of GE crops, and plenty that's bad, and left in the hands of the current players it probably will kill millions of people, and indeed it already is. But the picture might be rather different if some real science were applied rather than just Monsanto's bottom-line, along with some sense and the precautionary principle. We don't need the crops anyway, we already have better crops, and there are better ways of developing them than GE. But it doesn't only apply to crops. So many times with technology we find that the last condition is worse than the first. Extrapolating this out to its logical conclusion, we find that all technology advances are bad. :-) A little too sweeping Peter (useful things, brooms). Could this be the reason that almost all religious leaders (and by that I mean Jesus, Mohammad, Bhuddha, etc) shun technology. Do they? Jesus was a carpenter, what did he use to cut wood, his teeth? He said nice things about chickens, but chickens are not as Mother Nature made them, they're a technological fix. So is agriculture itself, and I don't think Jesus, Mohammad or Buddha opposed it. Anyone that proposes technological fixes will find themselves at odds with Jesus. Um, who do you think is right? Technological fixes is a loaded term. Sure technology has given us open heart surgery and moonflight, but 500 years from now, if planet earth is burnt and lifeless due to our actions(air and water pollution, nuclear exchange, global warming, infectious disease, extinctions, etc.), then what can we say about technology? Would you ascribe all that to technology? Tools are just tools, it depends what you do with them. The cases you cite are very largely not the result of humans using tools and technology, the scale is different, it's the scale that corporations and governments operate on, not people. Most people aren't so dumb. It's not the technology that's the problem, it's this: How to kill a mammoth: http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg30628.html But you keep shying away from that distinction. So you keep hitting the wrong target. The last condition is much worse than the first, even if the first is a caveman existance and even including leprosy and black plague etc. The thing about cavemen is they didn't live in caves, that's where the big cats lived that liked eating cavemen. They eventually learnt to fight the cats, but not until they'd mastered fire. Definitely a technological fix. Cavemen with clubs, spears, knives... Quite a few animals also use tools, and so do birds. Is this all bad technology, in your view? Best Keith BR Peter G. Thailand http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081225/ap_on_sc/do_it_yourself_dna;_ylt=AjW2XcTZOjvv__NlwrDzXTZ34T0D Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home Associated Press Writer Marcus Wohlsen, Associated Press Writer - 2 hrs 38 mins ago AP - Meredith L. Patterson, a computer programmer by day, conducts an experiment in the dining room of her SAN FRANCISCO - The Apple computer was invented in a garage. Same with the Google search engine. Now, tinkerers are working at home with the basic building blocks of life itself. Using homemade lab equipment and the wealth of scientific knowledge available online, these hobbyists are trying to create new life forms through genetic engineering - a field long dominated by Ph.D.s toiling in university and corporate laboratories. In her San Francisco dining room lab, for example, 31-year-old computer programmer Meredith L. Patterson is trying to develop genetically altered yogurt bacteria that will glow green to signal the presence of melamine, the chemical that turned Chinese-made baby formula and pet food deadly. People can really work on projects for the good of humanity while learning about something they want to learn about in the process, she said. So far, no major gene-splicing discoveries have come out anybody's kitchen or garage. But critics of the movement worry that these amateurs could one day unleash an environmental or medical disaster. Defenders say the future Bill Gates of biotech could be developing a cure for cancer in the garage. Many of these amateurs may have studied biology in college but have no advanced degrees and are not earning a living in the biotechnology field. Some proudly call themselves biohackers - innovators who push technological boundaries and put the spread of knowledge before profits. In Cambridge, Mass., a group called DIYbio is setting up a community lab where the public could use chemicals and lab equipment, including a used
[Biofuel] Study Warns Of Environmental Crisis
http://www.precaution.org/lib/08/prn_study_warns_of_environmental_crisis.081114.htm From: Yale Daily News November 14, 2008 Study Warns Of Environmental Crisis [Rachel's introduction: A new study concludes that avoiding climate disasters depends on rapidly reducing our reliance on fossil fuel. The study concludes that coal burning is the greatest source of atmospheric carbon dioxide and it needs to be phased out altogether.] By Stephannie Furtak If new research [http://www.precaution.org/lib/co2--where_should_humanity_aim.081114.pdf 2.5 Mbytes PDF] by Yale scientists is any indication, it may already be too late for the environment. An international team of 10 researchers -- including Yale professors of geology and geophysics Mark Pagani and Robert Berner -- determined that current levels of carbon dioxide have already surpassed the estimated cutoff level that would cause damage to the planet. The study also found that this threshold level is actually much lower than previously estimated. Still, one Yale climate expert said it would be impossible to implement policies to reach the goal the study sets out. Past research on greenhouse gases indicated that 450 parts per million of atmospheric CO2 would be the tipping point beyond which the effects of global warming would begin to rapidly escalate. But the study, which was headed by James Hansen, a professor of Earth and Environmental Studies at Columbia University and NASA's lead climate scientist, revised this theory, showing that this threshold level is closer to 350 ppm. The level of CO2 found in the atmosphere -- 385 ppm -- is already higher than this, and is increasing annually by two ppm. It appears as if we have reached CO2 levels not seen for the past several million years, Pagani said in an e-mail to the News. The study concluded that avoiding climate disasters depends on reducing our reliance on fossil fuel. The point of identifying dangerous levels is to focus the attention of policy makers that decide our fate, Pagani said, and give them estimates that they can use to develop national policy and international agreements. In their paper, the researchers noted that if left unchecked, current consumption of fossil fuels will eventually result in levels of atmospheric CO2 that are double those of pre-industrial civilization, leading, down the road, to a nearly ice-free planet. We cannot yet predict the precise CO2 levels that will force the climate state to radically shift, Pagani said. We don't understand how fast this change might come, but we know Earth's climate system has the capacity to change rapidly. An escalation in climate changes that are already occurring -- including heavy rainfall and floods, more intense dry periods and fires, and shifting of climatic zones -- will eventually bring about irreversible changes, such as extermination of species and sea level rise as a result of ice sheet disintegration, Hansen said. President-elect Barack Obama's transition team has said it plans to implement an economic cap-and-trade plan that would reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and invest into renewable energy sources. According to the study, coal burning is the greatest source of atmospheric carbon dioxide and its use needs to be phased out altogether. Twenty-five percent of CO2 emissions from fossil fuels linger in the air for several centuries, Pagani noted. The authors cited several recommendations for reducing CO2 levels, including improving agricultural practices and reforestation. Geo- engineering methods, such as artificial removal of CO2 from the atmosphere, were discounted as too expensive. Coal supply is finite, so we must move to other fuels eventually, Hansen said. Why not do it sooner, rather than later? Hansen said that re-attaining climatic conditions similar to those of the pre-industrial period can only be achieved if the carbon contained in our remaining fossil fuel reserves is never emitted into the atmosphere. But Arnulf Grubler, professor of energy and technology at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Sciences, said that the study does not make any practical suggestions for achieving such a low level of atmospheric CO2 in such a short period of time. If we want to take that seriously, we have to stop emitting CO2 immediately, Grubler said in reference to the study's new CO2 threshold. We have to shut off the entire world's energy system, and even then we're not reaching that target! Grubler also said that the study did not take into account the other factors that must be addressed before any plan for reducing CO2 levels can be implemented. The study also betrayed a lack of awareness about policy making, Grubler added. There are international legal structures, he said. From an economic, an engineering perspective, it's infeasible. The study was published in the 2008 edition of the Open Atmospheric Science Journal.
Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
, for in material civilization good and evil advance together and maintain the same pace. 'Abdu'l-Baha, /The Promulgation of Universal Peace/, p. 109 |http://bahai.us| -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20081226/d5f7b766/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
in the world who, with fairly simple tools and modest resources, could build a Kalashnikov rifle, and any reasonable analysis of the real problems of war in the world today would have to admit that small arms cause far more devastation than any battleship or atom bomb. So. We cannot go backwards. And we cannot stay here. The only reasonable action is to move forward, and that direction is defined by improvements in the peace and well being of every human being, man, woman and child, in the world. Further, the only possible way to achieve such ends is to change the hearts. This clearly follows from Einstein's maxim that we have become technological giants while remaining moral midgets. From my point of view, then, the question which should underlie every effort we make in our lives is: how can be be of benefit to others? How can I improve my armamentarium of virtues, the fundamental tools required for me to be truly human? d. -- David William House The Complete Biogas Handbook |www.completebiogas.com| No matter how far the material world advances, it cannot establish the happiness of mankind. Only when material and spiritual civilization are linked and coordinated will happiness be assured. Then material civilization will not contribute its energies to the forces of evil in destroying the oneness of humanity, for in material civilization good and evil advance together and maintain the same pace. 'Abdu'l-Baha, /The Promulgation of Universal Peace/, p. 109 |http://bahai.us| -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20081226/d5f7b766/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/ ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
well, this is an interesting discussion! on the one hand, i agree with keith that it's less about technology 'yes' vs. technology 'no' than about who is making that decision. yet for this very reason, i also agree with peter and doug, because once you get a high enough degree of centralization (in a society), the technologies that are pursued become ever more rarified and removed from the human level. the probability that there be malevolent purpose behind the pursuit of a given technology increases exponentially, as does the probability that those who will suffer as a result of a given technology will far outnumber those who will benefit (though, this does not have to lead inevitably to the destruction of humankind). david, i agree that we can only move forward, in the sense that we cannot change what has already happened. but this does not mean, for example, that where things (power, capital, resources) have become overly centralized, that they cannot be decentralized. ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
with the persistent cough in the small cage when we think lion. Rather, lion is that ideal lion, standing on hill in Africa, strong, magnificent and lordly. In the same way, while H S were certainly homo sapiens, genetically human, they were rather far from what I consider to be ideal humans. (As for Curtis LeMay, I frankly don't know enough about him to offer an opinion. I assume you are referring to his bombing of Japanese cities, similar to the bombing of Dresden in WWII. Tragic and terrible, without question.) But regardless, my comment was about me, not about others. My context and comment were clearly from my point of view, and as such, pretty clearly about my approach to life, not a judgment of others. d. -- David William House The Complete Biogas Handbook |www.completebiogas.com| Make no search for water. But find thirst, And water from the very ground will burst. (Rumi, a Persian mystic poet, quoted in /Delight of Hearts/, p. 77) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20081226/7ad37a13/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
Re: [Biofuel] Amateurs are trying genetic engineering at home
Chris, Chris Burck wrote: [...] i also agree with peter and doug, because once you get a high enough degree of centralization (in a society), the technologies that are pursued become ever more rarified and removed from the human level. With respect, I disagree. The clear and most fundamental trend in technology is toward the destruction or evanescence of inertia. For writing letters, electrons have far less inertia than paper. For preservation of images, contrast a 50's TV camera with a modern cell phone equipped with camera. And so on. Likewise, the clear trend is therefore towards the personalization of technology, both for good and bad. Again I would refer back to the article that started this thread. At the same time that the ecosystem of technology is rapidly becoming far more complex (consider GPS, and its reliance on Einstein's 1916 general theory of relativity, among a bewildering array of other technologies) it continues to become more personal (consider the $150 GPS receiver). Then think about a Google mash-up, where Web 2.0 comes together with GPS to allow a map of everyone in a given state that owns a Great Dane, as an hypothetical example. And not only can I sit at my desk and with a single powerful mouse click see that mash-up, I can create another one, if I choose to educate myself, for displaying gas stations and tracking their price-per-gallon. While it is true that many will not choose to educate themselves regarding such technologies, there is little to stop anyone with the fundamental capacity from so doing. Consider the many differences, in that regard, between Carnegie's libraries and the Internet. In what way, then, are these technologies becoming more rarefied and removed? ...the probability that there be malevolent purpose behind the pursuit of a given technology increases exponentially, as does the probability that those who will suffer as a result of a given technology will far outnumber those who will benefit (though, this does not have to lead inevitably to the destruction of humankind). Again, there are examples of these points, to be sure (the green revolution, some aspects of globalization), but I am unpersuaded that the probability of malevolent purpose increases exponentially, or that those who suffer will for some reason necessarily outnumber those who will benefit. These things happen, as I just said, but this has nothing to do with the inherent nature of technology. Rather, it simply demonstrates the increased need for responsible choices, the destructive nature of greed (witness our present financial condition), and so on. In this regard, the bad news about technology-- it can cause problems-- seems exceeded by its good news-- it can easily solve far more problems than it creates, given only that it is properly used. Perhaps we can agree that technology acts to magnify what is in the human heart, which is what I have clearly been saying; and that therefore the only solution is not technological, not available to us through the application of force, not impossible, not found anywhere except the original place of its genesis: the human heart. We may not know how, we may think it difficult-- clearly it seems rare, which may be an artifact of what is considered newsworthy, but just as clearly it is not impossible. People change. I do; don't you? But regardless, the point is that we can't solve the problem unless we address its source. We have to change the hearts. david, i agree that we can only move forward, in the sense that we cannot change what has already happened. but this does not mean, for example, that where things (power, capital, resources) have become overly centralized, that they cannot be decentralized. I think they can, and have, and will be. As I said previously on this forum, we've never seen such a thing as the human species, all grown up. We know that it happens to children, and we know that most folks, often in spite of their parents, turn out all right. But will mankind grow up? Will mankind be mature, some day? I don't feel the need to prove it to anyone, particularly, although I'm happy to discuss it, but for me, as I see it, the answer is yes, we will. Yes. d. -- David William House The Complete Biogas Handbook |www.completebiogas.com| Make no search for water. But find thirst, And water from the very ground will burst. (Rumi, a Persian mystic poet, quoted in /Delight of Hearts/, p. 77) -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: /pipermail/attachments/20081226/7165260b/attachment.html ___ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/sustainablelorgbiofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (70,000 messages): http://www.mail
