Police probing greenpeace. Witnesses wanted.

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Do you really believe that if one supports general scientific research that one must support all research done in the name of science?

For example if I support the science of climate change, should I, in your view, support Japans ‘scientific’ whaling program?

I-filed said :

Good on you Greenpeace!
And good on Shane Rattenbury for coming out in support of the action on ABC666 this morning …

An MLA that supports criminal behaviour, rather than use his political influence to try and do something. What a politician to be proud of

And there I was thinking that it was only aliens that ‘probe’ humans!! Then again dressed in their white suits on a foggy morning the Police might have confused them for aliens if they had been there.

I’m suprised that if the crops were so valuable that no security measures were in place

Thoroughly Smashed said :

Nice work. I’d ask you to explain how you think the experiments that were performed on prisoners in Nazi Germany were scientific in any way

You would be amazed at the frequency of academic citations which originate from the work and outputs of Unit 731, especially in fields like epidemiology, water purification, anesthesia, blunt force trauma survival, high and low pressure exposure, organ donation, burn management, toxicology, and the lasting influence on surgical procedure.
The German concentration camp doctors pioneered treatments of frostbite, hypothermia, clinical hypothermic surgery preparation, and both the early diagnosis and treatment of cervical cancer.

All belligerents in WWII explored, developed, and refined industrial and computational processes.
The Allies were no less monstrous, and their progress has been immense.
Modern chemotherapy owes its existence to Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and the pregnant women who were experimented on by Manhattan Project researchers.

I cannot excuse their methods; but as a consequence of them we are in an industrial, economic, informational and social landscape entirely different to that in which we would be without their involvement.
Some might say we are better off, and accept that it cannot be undone. Few would try and reverse it.

Simplistic and false dilemmas, such as that which you’ve tried to assert of good science vs evil science diminish any argument you were trying to make.
CSIRO scientists and researchers are not Nazis, nor Unit 731 members, nor scientists obeying the wartime demands of a Department of Defence.
You live in Canberra, they are possibly your neighbours, your acquaintances and their children play with their children.
Their organisation, despite being motivated by commercial and economic interests, remains subject to both direct political and ethical oversight.
Your simplistic claims would most likely offend many of them. Most likely, not one of them would heroise Mengele.

Science is a process (called the scientific method).
Its inputs are questions, doubt, and uncertainty.
Occasionally it outputs a better theory of knowledge, but primarily it produces different reasons for uncertainty, different questions, or bigger doubts.
Technology helps resolve those doubts, serve those purposes, or overcome those problems.

PS: I don’t work for CSIRO, just know some people who do.

Stevian said :

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Just like the Nazi concentration camp experiments?

This is probably the stupidest comment I’ve ever read on this site.

Thoroughly Smashed said :

Stevian said :

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Just like the Nazi concentration camp experiments?

Nice work. I’d ask you to explain how you think the experiments that were performed on prisoners in Nazi Germany were scientific in any way, but it’s time for you to leave now. You invoked Godwin’s Law, how does it feel to have no credibility?

Jinx!

Stevian said :

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Just like the Nazi concentration camp experiments?

Godwins Law already? Really?

Stevian said :

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Just like the Nazi concentration camp experiments?

Nice work. I’d ask you to explain how you think the experiments that were performed on prisoners in Nazi Germany were scientific in any way, but it’s time for you to leave now. You invoked Godwin’s Law, how does it feel to have no credibility?

Good on you Greenpeace!
And good on Shane Rattenbury for coming out in support of the action on ABC666 this morning …

what_the said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Morgan said :

Of course the irony is that Greenpeace accepts climate change as real because of science, but they won’t accept that CSIRO are using science to understand the safety of GM crops.

Just because you accept and endorse one aspect of science does not make it is ironic if you do not support all scientific experimentation.

Why, it’s all based on the same scientific method and procedures.

Just like the Nazi concentration camp experiments?