Force of Nature -- Environmental Terrorists Unmasked -- Junk Science -- 2009 09 01 -- Gwyn Morgan --...

8/9/2019 Force of Nature -- Environmental Terrorists Unmasked -- Junk Science -- 2009 09 01 -- Gwyn Morgan -- MODIFIED --

1/11

0011//0099//22000099

1

Beware

the harmful consequences

of following

junk science

September 1st, 2009

Gwyn MorganR e t i r e d f o u n d i n g C E O o f E n C a n a C o r p .

nfortunately, junk science is a widespreaddisease. >>

The man who removes the moss from our lawn after the West

Coast's winter rainy season was depressed and bewildered. After

spending decades building his clientele and practising his trade in

the most careful and responsible manner, he is being legislated out

of business. The CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY is calling for a B.C. wide ban on the sale of weed killers and insecticides for " non

agricultural " use. Several B.C. municipalities already prohibit the

use of such products, even to the point where the bits of vinegar

our lawn guy puts on our patches of pavingstone moss are consid-

ered a public danger.


2/11

0011//0099//22000099

2

Here in Victoria, many of the city's signature cherry trees will go

through a slow and ugly death from blight because of the banning

of a product that could safely protect them. It also means ferns,

dogwood and other native species will be defenceless as they are

overrun by introduced foreign invaders. The cancer society bases

its campaign on the claim that weed killers such as Roundup and

insecticides such as Raid may be linked to certain types of cancer.

Yet the medical evidence is scant. One study found that men work-ing in pesticide manufacturing plants had a slightly elevated fre-

quency of prostate cancer, but several other studies found no rela-

tionship between pesticides and cancer. Some studies have sug-

gested that farmers who use large amounts of weed killer may have

an increased risk of lymphoma, but a large U.S. study found the

difference to be a statistically insignificant.

Those who defend such kneejerk public policy actions often citethe " precautionary principle ". But if believing in junk science

means people are to be driven out of business and public land-

scapes are to be left unprotected from blights and invasive species,

and if home gardeners are forbidden from using the latest and best

products, what is " precautionary "about that?

UNFORTUNATELY, JUNK SCIENCE IS A WIDESPREAD DISEASE. Environ-

mental activists are generally against socalled chemical fertilizers.But what makes manure and compost more virtuous than nitrogen

and potassium fertilizers ?


3/11

0011//0099//22000099

3

Let's start with nitrogen. The scientific fact is that the soil doesn't

know the difference between nitrogen sources, as long as it gets

enough. Potassium fertilizers are made from a naturally occurring

mineral called potash and, here again, the soil doesn't care where it

comes from. While organic products are generally very safe, there

is no doubt that the raw animal waste sometimes used as fertilizer

carries a higher consumer and groundwater pathogen risk. On the

other hand, the composting often used in organic gardening has a

positive impact on soil stability and water retention.

If soil science doesn't make organic food a superior choice, what

about the claims of nutritional superiority ? A recent largescale

U.S. study found no discernible difference. Organic foods costmore because they are more labourintensive, and yields per arable

hectare are lower than conventional farming.

The plain fact is that organic food consumption is a feelgood in-

dulgence for those willing and able to pay a premium, but organic

farming methods could never begin to feed every Canadian, let

alone the world's population.


4/11

0011//0099//22000099

4

My global " junk science " award goes to the myriad environmental

groups and associated acolytes united in opposition to GENETICALLY

MODIFIED FOODS (GM foods), or as they have labelled them,

" franken-foods ". Policy makers in Europe have reacted by banning

domestic production or importation of GM foods. This despite the

fact that there are no credible studies showing negative impacts

from consuming GM foods, and there isn't even a plausible scien-tific theory as to why there would be.

Most of the grains, fruits and vegetables that make up modern diets

are vastly different than their ancient ancestors. Humans have

continuously crossbred food plants in search of higher yields, im-

proved taste, better nutrition and disease resistance. An important

Canadian example is canola; traditional " genetic modification "

methods transformed the bitter rapeseed into a healthy and tastyoilseed.

Astounding progress in identifying the genetic building blocks of

organisms has accelerated the long and arduous genetic modifica-

tion process, offering huge potential leaps forward in the increas-

ingly urgent search for higher yielding and more nutritious crops to

feed a hungry world. Erosion caused by denuding natural vegeta-

tion, groundwater depletion and biological runoff make agriculturalproduction the most damaging human endeavour to our planet's

soil, water and aquatic life. GM foods research shows promise of

making a big difference.


5/11

0011//0099//22000099

5

Seed crops that lower fertilizer requirements and need less water

are already a reality. Agragiant Monsanto has developed an herbi-

cideresistant seed grain that eliminates the need for fallow tillage

to control weeds, thereby reducing water needs, air emissions and

soil erosion. This is only one of the GM foods advances made by

this innovative and researchintensive company, yet the " franken-

foods "crowd's propaganda has portrayed Monsanto as an environ-

mentdestroying corporate pariah.

And so we come full circle in the great farm and garden junk sci-ence game, from British Columbia's wellmeaning but scientifically

illiterate municipal councillors, to the CANADIAN CANCER SOCIETY's

campaign against weed and bug killers, to the organic industry's

selfserving claim of environmental and nutritional superiority, to

the GM foodsopposing " franken-foods " crowd. It's hard to find

evidence that supports any of these claims, but it isn't hard to see

the harmful consequences these misguided policies can, and do,

have.


6/11

0011//0099//22000099

6

GM Crops :Battlefield

Researchers who develop genetically modified crops can face the wrath of anti-

biotech activists. A news feature in this weeks Nature explores attacks of a dif-

ferent sort. Scientists whose work suggests that biotech crops might have

harmful environmental effects are finding themselves under fire from others

within the scientific community.

THE CRITICS SAY THEY WANT TO PREVENT PAPERS THEY DEEM TO HAVE

SCIENTIFIC FLAWS FROM INAPPROPRIATELY INFLUENCING POLICY MAKERS .

BUT SOME SCIENTISTS SAY THAT AT LEAST SOME OF THIS ACTIVITY MAY

BE GOING BEYOND WHATS ACCEPTABLE IN SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSIONS,

TRAMPLING IMPORTANT RESEARCH QUESTIONS IN THE PROCESS AND STI-

FLING DEBATE.


7/11

0011//0099//22000099

7

Day after day after day written in the newspapers, heard on

the radio, seen on the television, and displayed throughout cy-berspace the environmental terror movement is urging for

measures to terrorize and destroy the Green Space Industry.

Their ideas have little basis in fact or science. Nonetheless, the

movement has gained some powerful allies, such as provincial

legislators and municipal councils that have been described as

spineless and nave.

As an example, take the following phrase The world

would be a better place if lawns and golf courses

were maintained more ecologically. If each of us re-

ceived five cents every time we heard this phrase, we would be

literally spitting gold ingots.

Lets think for a minute ! How does this phrase really apply to

Green Space Industry? Its not complicated. The Green SpaceIndustrycan be described as the planets GREAT CONSERVATIONIST.

The stewardship of the Green Space Industry in maintaining and

conserving the worlds largest ground cover vegetation has con-tributed extensively to THE BEAUTIFICATION OF OUR LANDSCAPES, and

THE PRESERVATION OF OUR ENVIRONMENT.


8/11

0011//0099//22000099

8

By contrast, the modern environmental terror groups can bemore precisely identified as a club of PRESERVATIONISTS. They

have capriciously proclaimed that the natural environmentneeds

their stewardship. Much of the movement is obsessed with pre-

serving our world with antimodernist and antitechnology think-

ing. It often thrives onjunk science.

It is a fact that much of

the environmental ter-

ror movement is inher-

ently opposed to the

modern maintenance of

turfgrasses. (One no-

table exception is

Audubon International,

but not Audubon stateorganizations.) Alleg-

edly, the use of cos-

metic pesticides is not

compatible with natural

settings. The move-

ment has traditionallypreferred JUNK LAWNSAND JUNK LANDSCAPES

that are unaltered by

human activity, and are

infested with weeds, insects, and disease. The terrorists particu-

larly dislike the cosmeticstandards used for the maintenance ofGOLF COURSES, which are arbitrarily considered too lofty.

We are reliving the DDT saga all over again. The environ-

mental terror movement wishes to terrorize and annihilate the

Green Space Industry, just like it did with the makers ofDDT !


9/11

0011//0099//22000099

9

(Or else ... !)


10/11

0011//0099//22000099

10

FORCE OF NATURE was launched for continuous transmission on the Internet on January 1st, 2009. It is

a series of enewsletters destined for the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY, the ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT, politi-

cians, municipalities, and the media, nationwide across Canada, and parts of the United States. FORCE

OF NATURE is produced in two parts. First. The MEDIA REPORTitself thatreports on the current eventsaffecting the future of the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY. Second. INDEPENDENT PERSPECTIVE,which is a run-ning commentary, sometimes also of a more technical in nature.

FORCE OF NATURE is the brainchild of William H. Gathercole and his entourage. The opinions expressed

in these enewsletters, even though from an INDEPENDENT PERSPECTIVE, may not reflect those of everyone

in the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY, or Mr. Gathercoles many associates. Be warned ! Mr. Gathercole andhis team may sometimes be very irreverent and fearless with these enewsletters.

William H. Gathercole holds a degree in Horticulture from the UNIVERSITY OF GUELPH, and another pure

and applied science degree from MCGILL UNIVERSITY. He has worked in virtually all aspects of the

GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY, including public affairs, personal safety, and environmental issues. Mr. Gath-ercole has been a consultant and instructor for decades. Mr. Gathercole has been following the evolu-

tion ofENVIRONMENTAL TERRORISMfor over a quartercentury. His involvement in environmental issuesreached a fevered pitch in the 1990s, when he orchestrated, with others, legal action against unethicaland excessive municipal regulations restricting the use of pest control products. ( i.e. the Town of Hud-

son. ) Although he can be accused of being ANTIENVIRONMENTMOVEMENT, he is, in fact, simply a

strong advocate FOR the GREEN SPACE INDUSTRY. However, this position has not precluded him fromcriticizing the industry itself. Nonetheless, his vast knowledge of our long journey with environmental is-

sues is UNDENIABLE. ( Hopefully ! ) For many years, Mr. Gathercole has been a contributing columnist

forTURF&RECREATION Magazine, Canadas Turf and Grounds Maintenance Authority.

All pictures contained in FORCE OF NATURE were found somewhere on the Internet. We believe that theyare in the public domain, as either educational tools, industry archives, promotional stills, publicity pho-tos, or press media stock.

Information presented in FORCE OF NATURE has been developed for the education and entertainment ofthe reader. The events, characters, companies, and organizations, depicted in this document are not al-

ways fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living or dead, may not be coincidental.

The following titles are currently available. (Or, will be available in the near future.) Alberta Prohibi-tion British Columbia Prohibition Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment Con-sequences David Suzuki Foundation DDT and Our World of Politicized Science Death and theEnvironmental Movement Golf and Landscape Trade Industries June Irwin, The Princess of JunkScience Kazimiera Jean Cottam Kelowna BC Prohibition New Brunswick Prohibition NovaScotia Prohibition Ontario Prohibition Organic Fertilizers Pets and Lawn Care Chemicals

Prince Edward Island Prohibition Quebec Prohibition Rachel Carson, The Queen of Junk Science Randy Hillier, The Next Premier of Ontario Salmon Arm BC Prohibition Special Report The 9/11Era of the Green Space Industry The Failure of Integrated Pest Management The Industry StrikesBack The Misconceptions About Cancer The Wisdom of the Solomons Wisconsin Fertilizer Pro-hibition ASK FOR A COPY OF ANY BACK ISSUE OF FORCE OF NATURE TODAY.


11/11

0011//0099//22000099

11

Date post:	29-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	uncleadolph
View:	221 times
Download:	0 times

Force of Nature -- Environmental Terrorists Unmasked -- Junk Science -- 2009 09 01 -- Gwyn Morgan --...

Documents