Volatility

January 31, 2014

The Imminent End of the Scientism Cult

Filed under: Scientism/Technocracy — Tags: — Russ @ 5:14 am

<

The Archdruid:
 
“One of the standard tropes of the contemporary faith in progress, after all, insists that religion is an outworn relic sure to be tipped into history’s compost heap sometime very soon. By “religion,” of course, those who make this claim inevitably mean “theist religion,” or more precisely “any religion other than mine”—the civil religion of progress is of course supposed to be exempt from that fate, since its believers insist that it’s not a religion at all….
 
The imminent disappearance of all (other) religion that has featured so heavily in [pseudo-]rationalist rhetoric for the last century and a half or so thus fills roughly the same role in their faith as the Second Coming in Christianity: the point at which the Church Militant morphs into the Church Triumphant.  So far, at least to the best of my knowledge, nobody in the atheist [he means scientistic] scene has yet proclaimed the date by which Reason will triumph over Superstition—the initial capitals, again, tell you when an abstraction has turned into a mythic figure—but it’s probably just a matter of time before some [pseudo-]rationalist equivalent of Harold Camping gladdens the heart of the faithful by giving them a date on which to pin their hopes.”
 
At least one such date has long since come and passed. At the turn of the century Monsanto had high hopes that by this time GMOs would be globally Triumphant. I’m happy to report that we the people have disappointed them and did not “just sort of surrender”.
 
The turning point is at hand.

>

Advertisements

20 Comments

  1. Good morning Russ. Here is a talk supporting your point of view. If you haven’t already heard of him, Rupert Sheldrake is a tireless pioneering biologist on the teaching of science as incorrecthere (I would say ‘hoax’ but he wouldn’t, being a very proper well-educated Brit). I find his arguments convincing and entertaining. I particularly like his line that he attributes to Terence McKenna, referring to the inventors of the ‘big bang’ theory of the origin of the universe: “Give me one free miracle and I’ll supply the rest.” Applicable, of course, to the big religions as well. Charming as those ideas are, like virgin births and rising from the dead, explainable in terms of metaphors, they operate best as brain washing tools: If you will believe that, you will believe anything.

    Its time to push back on this insanity; a hierarchical system run by crazy people.

    I think this video should be promoted and widely distributed. I chose the clearest of several on the Internet.

    The establishment shuns Sheldrake of course. Videos of some of the science big names laughing at him are interesting and unconvincing. Shunning seems to be the preferred ammunition against all those who dare argue with ‘authorities.’ They ignore the an and/or his ‘work.’

    I like Sheldrake’s approach in support of ‘science,’ That ‘science’ is supposed to be a forum for considering ideas and testing them in an ongoing dialogue, rather than like a religion, they have a lock on the ‘laws’ and your ideas must go through their process to be taken seriously. In other words, you must first be the endorsed product of an insidiously lengthy education that takes no chances; they take prisoners.

    Comment by LeeAnne — February 1, 2014 @ 8:35 am

    • Thanks LeeAnne, I’ll check those out. Your description sounds right. Science is a fraud if it isn’t based on empirical fact (GMOs, for example have all the facts against them and zero on their side), and of course anything based on Big Lies (like that the goal of corporations is to “Feed the World” rather than starve it, or that industrial agriculture is physically capable of doing so regardless) is nothing but religion or pseudo-religious ideology. Scientism is the most noxious and despicable such ideology.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2014 @ 11:15 am

  2. Down with reason. Long live superstition. We don’t need no stinkin’ science. Just keep the bullcrap flowing Russ, that’s all we need!

    Comment by Albert E. — February 1, 2014 @ 10:51 am

    • No, this is a rational, science-based site. We’ll leave the flat-earth superstition and anti-rationalism to the likes of you, until we can be rid of you.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2014 @ 11:09 am

    • is this you Albert?

      Comment by LeeAnne — February 1, 2014 @ 12:17 pm

  3. Russ, have you seen the latest GMO cultist argument about “copper sulfate”? Apparently it’s a common compound in many organic pesticide sprays. I still don’t see how that would be a pro-GMO argument so much as an “anti-organic” straw man, but was wondering if you had anything on this?

    Comment by Pete — February 1, 2014 @ 1:47 pm

    • I haven’t seen anything specific about copper sulfate, but I suppose it falls into the fallacy genre of, “certified organic allows this-or-that, which is synthetic and/or possibly harmful, therefore organic is no better than crops systemically full of glyphosate, glufosinate, 2,4-D-derived dioxins, Bt endotoxins, neonics, fungicides, etc…..”

      The answer to this is:

      1. We hold no special brief for the USDA Organic certification, which is imperfect in many ways. So the “argument” is non-responsive as usual. Agroecology, or “organic” in the sense of the term as originally propounded by Albert Howard, Robert Rodale and others, is based on natural methods of pest and disease control, not on spraying poisons. The USDA’s allowing copper sulfate, Bt sprays, and similar things is a measure of how the certification is an imperfect compromise. That’s part of why it’s not sufficient, and why “co-existence” is impossible.

      2. It’s also a fraud in that, while the organic certification allows some dubious practices, these are mild compared to the toxification of industrial crops and GMOs in particular. I don’t know much about copper sulfate, but I’ll use the analogous example of Bt.

      (Note, BTW, that the hacks prefer not to cite Bt when they use this kind of argument. That’s for the obvious reason that their whole business model depends upon massive deployment of Bt toxins, so they don’t want to say anything which would draw attention to the toxicity of these for humans. That’s why they’ll substitute something like “copper sulfate”, which occupies the same place in the argument.)

      Bt toxin is proven to be toxic and allergenic to farm workers even in its sprayed form, through inhalation and topical contact. It certainly should not be allowed under the USDA certification.

      But that’s only the beginning. Bt spray is used only acutely, during infestations. It’s broken down by sunlight, degraded by high temperatures and by leaf substances. It can be washed away by rain or by consumer washing. It contains a protoxin that becomes active only in the digestive tract of insects.

      But the Bt toxin expressed by a GMO is constantly being produced in every cell of the plant, at vastly more toxic concentrations than those of the spray. Bt-expressing GMOs may contain 3000-5000 times the poison concentration as the spray. The poison is fully bioactive from the onset of expression. This poison is endemic to every cell of the crop and cannot be washed off.

      Therefore, there’s no comparison between the Bt spray allowed under the organic certification and the poison produced by GMOs containing Bt-expressing transgenes.

      And that’s just one of the many highly toxic and carcinogenic poisons with which industrial crops are indelibly suffused. Almost all GMOs are systemically full of herbicide residue from glyphosate, glufosinate, and others. They’re also systemically loaded with neonicotinoid insecticides and fungicides.

      In every way, industrial false crops are veritably poison crops. There’s no comparison between them and certified organic crops, even if some imperfect practices are allowed under the certification.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2014 @ 3:03 pm

      • Excellent, thank you. Our farm decided not to jump through all of the Organic certification processes for all the obvious reasons but we are still dedicated to chemical-free, responsible agricultural practices. After our first year of growing, it doesn’t appear that our customers seem too concerned about the organic label so much as seeking food from a real grower.

        As for the Scientism cult, they are a brutish bunch of bullies who sound like computer programs when you try and reason with them…”Superstitious, crazy, psychotic, creationist, elitist, pseudo-science, conspiracy theorist” are just a few of the common labels they use to try and end the conversation before it begins. I hope you don’t mind, I’ve been sourcing some of your argumentation principles and posts to help shoot down the fanatics. Keep up the great work! You are one of my many inspirations for leaving the city to try my hand at agriculture and join the food fight on the front lines.

        Comment by Pete — February 1, 2014 @ 4:36 pm

      • Thanks for the good words, Pete. It inspires me to hear that. Great to hear you’re learning stuff here you can use. That’s the number one reason I’m writing it.

        The Scientism cult are exactly as you say. Ironically, they themselves are:

        1. Evolution deniers. They long denied that herbicide and insecticide resistance would be the inevitable result of GMO deployment. Then they denied it was happening. Now that they have no choice but to admit it (and celebrate it, since it’s part of their propaganda on behalf of “second generation” HT varieties) they still deny that escalating the number of transgenes will do nothing but escalate the ever-more toxic bioweapons arms race which the weeds and bugs will certainly win once and for all. They also deny evolution in their support for subtherapeutic antibiotics use and the use of antibiotic resistance markers in genetic engineering, since no sane person who understands how microbes evolve resistance to antibiotics would want such practices to exist.

        2. Creationists. The only difference between their theology and that of other creationist sects is that they see themselves or their technocratic heroes as deities in the laboratory, Creating a “true” world to replace this Fallen one. They probably think the Big Bang took place in some vast physics lab, which is ensconced in another, and so on forever. They’re among the most insane and stupid of cultists, real scum.

        How’s everything on the farm? What you say about being low-external-input but not getting the Organic certification makes sense. I know of lots of farms like that. A farm where I helped out this past summer is thinking of taking the certification plunge, although they told me they weren’t sure if it would garner them enough extra customers to make it worthwhile. They seem to be doing well at the size and in the state they are, organic but not Certified. They said the main practice they would have to change is seed sourcing, since most of their seeds aren’t certified, although they come from outfits who take the Safe Seed Pledge.

        Comment by Russ — February 1, 2014 @ 5:46 pm

  4. The following links helped me when I dug into the copper sulfate issue. (Sorry to make a bad pun there on my first comment…) From the APS site on what constitutes USDA organic: “Copper sulfate — must be used in a way that minimizes accumulation in the soil.”

    http://www.apsnet.org/publications/apsnetfeatures/Pages/Organics.aspx

    And this: http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/cuso4gen.html

    Comment by Crowbird — February 1, 2014 @ 5:28 pm

    • Thanks Crowbird, those look good.

      That pun’s innocuous compared to some of the awful ones I’ve been guilty of.

      Comment by Russ — February 1, 2014 @ 5:47 pm

  5. Thanks Russ. Those Scientism examples are great. Think I might use them next time I’m getting a heap full of rubbish from the cultists. I always ask them if they can provide an answer as to exactly who it was that ever asked for/wanted GMOs besides the biotech cartel…. I guess that isn’t important to them because nobody can answer it. I guess if you’re hoisting your own petard, everyone else is just collateral damage.

    Thanks for asking about the farm. Coincidentally today is officially my one year anniversary of transplant from city boy (who never even owned a houseplant) to full-time farming. Our first year was great. Lots of trial and error but we grew just about everything one can grow in Georgia, raised some chickens (layers and broilers) and some Tamworth pigs as well. The feedback from the local markets was outstanding and we may take our goods up to the larger Atlanta markets this coming season. We are exploring supplying farm to table restaurants as well- as soon as we get our rhythms mastered. The experience has been humbling but the rewards are difficult to put in words…. Healthier physically and mentally, providing real food for the community… closer to the natural world… all that jazz. A moment of validation occurred when a sweet lady came by a few times sourcing our veggies for her fight against brain cancer. She had abandoned chemical dumps for nutrition and juicing and was/is winning. It occurred to me that farmers are also doctors in a way. “Let the food be thine medicine.”

    Apologies for the ramble. We have currently settled in as “certified naturally grown”. In GA, that basically means the same thing as organic. Rather than go through a costly and gnarly red tape machine, CNG is ‘peer-reviewed’ (ha, not in the Scientism corporate front group sense) by actual neighboring community farms. We self-police and collaborate. Who would’ve thunk that would be a good idea? It’s a functional and logical way for small-scale farmers to do their thing without having to get an FDA supermarket label on their food stuffs. Sourcing non-gmo feed for the animals has been challenging but otherwise everything is smooth like grass-fed butter.

    Just launched the site and having some trouble with the url but try http://www.honeywoodfarms.com

    Thanks again.

    Comment by Pete — February 1, 2014 @ 7:06 pm

    • You’re both an inspiration…

      Comment by Crowbird — February 1, 2014 @ 7:58 pm

      • Thanks Crowbird!

        Comment by Russ — February 2, 2014 @ 5:04 am

    • Exactly right. There was never any natural demand for GMOs. They’re 100% the result of a planned economy policy.

      Everything you say about the farm sounds great. (I could only see a logo and a “coming soon” announcement at your link.) Congratulations. In addition to my own growing, I’m planning to be involved with a friend’s pilot CSA this year. She already ran a small cooperative broiler program last year and this year wants to expand that and extend it to produce. She’s basically turning her land into a small farm.

      I’d love to hear more about how you’re faring with the non-GM feed. That’s always a major topic around here.

      Thanks for the inspiring example, Pete. You’re exactly the kind of farmer we need!

      Comment by Russ — February 2, 2014 @ 5:03 am

      • Very nice. I will definitely keep you posted. We have a feed supplier from middle Georgia we use but they have proven unreliable at times. The next closest place is in NC (not exactly local), but we have managed to keep all the critters on non-gmo feeds in addition to recycling all of our excess veggies.

        Try this link. http://honeywoodfarms.com/Home.html

        Comment by Pete — February 2, 2014 @ 7:15 am

      • Beautiful pictures, and the Berry quote says it all.

        I know of a heritage pig farm which grows their own barley and wheat to supplement the pigs’ forage, but other than them everyone who cares has to scramble, and not always succeed, to find affordable non-GM feed.

        My friend with the chickens has an all out blitz going to collect as much kitchen scraps as possible from everyone she knows, but affording non-GM feed on top of that will be tough.

        Comment by Russ — February 2, 2014 @ 8:59 am

      • Thanks Russ. Yes, we have discussed trying to grow our own feed as well. It may be inevitable. The cost is definitely an issue.

        Comment by Pete — February 2, 2014 @ 10:34 am

      • Keep us posted on how things are going. I’ll let you know if I hear or do anything interesting on that.

        Comment by Russ — February 2, 2014 @ 3:35 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

%d bloggers like this: