O those zany corporate scientists are at it again. You all remember science class in school? (Er....that was a question for those of you old enough to remember when our schools actually taught something and were not being run by "doctors of 'education'" and were not just factories teaching people how to pass standardized tests designed and administered by a corporate monopoly whose shareholders are...er.... doctors of "education"....ok ok....I got distracted). Well, back in the day, they used to teach us that science was about experiment and observation, formulating theories, testing and refining them until, voila, out pops a scientific law (except for theoretical physicists, who are allowed to do something called a "thought experiment" and prove it all by mathematical hieroglyphics, and, oh yea, and macroevolutionists, who have yet to contrive a billions-of-years-long-experiment to demonstrate speciation. But hey. Who's quibbling with Einstein and Darwin here? Not I).
Well, you get my point, I hope. If so, then read this:
For once, I'm actually impressed with the New York Times getting it right. Yes. You read that correctly, but it bears reading again: "Jeremy Rifkin, president of the Foundation on Economic Trends and a frequent critic of biotechnology, said that ''turning living creatures into chemical factories'' has obvious benefits, but that ''the environmental and ethical implications have not been explored.
''If the plants are raised outdoors and the new genes get into the wild gene pool,'' he said, ''it could have a potentially destabilizing effect on the ecological system. They are performing processes not performed in nature.'' Advocates of such experiments say these criticisms are probably exaggerated but agree that they need to be explored."
Wonderful. Great. Mad scientists are indeed mad, and the madness lies in abandoning the method of science itself under pressure from corporations in their insane rush to poison the food supply and very possibly the environment. At least the physicists tested their h-bombs, x-ray and gamma ray lasers, particle accelerators and neutron bombs to assure us (or perhaps scare us) that they worked. It is interesting to me that now, the two reigning theories in biology and physics - macroevolution and string theory - are theories that are really nothing more than tapestries of arguments and conclusions about a dataset, an interpretation. We're supposed to be reassured that nothing dire will happen based on the pronouncements of the theory.
And for those really paying attention, notice the esoteric, occult theme of the chimera entering here, with the creation of hybrid human-plant genes, "plantimals" or "vegemen" we might call them(and I'm reminded of a famous Lucille Ball commercial here: "And it's tasty too! Tastes just like candy!"). What are the effects on the environment? Why, we just don't know, because we haven't tested it. But it's ok. We're Global Glutton Agribusiness Inc.; we're your goobernment, and we just don't know because we just can't be bothered with the details of the public good any more.
Now, everyone get out your number two lead pencils, as we prepared to take our standardized tests, and become more lobotomized.