[pf] Fork in the evolution road

by Kaleopono

28 December 2000 01:53 UTC

David A, I read your Scientific American article "The New Precautionary
Principle" and think it is a good introduction of this more conservative
viewpoint and political orientation to otherwise oblivious scientifc and
technical specialists.  Congratulations for that success!

The editor rather than you probably wrote the article title, but I have to
ask:  New?  The precautionary principle has been around as long as
humankind, don't you think?

>From your article:  "The precautionary principle requires a different kind
of science, maintains Carolyn Raffensperger, SEHN's executive director.
'Science has been commodified. What we've created in the last 10 or 15 years
is a science that has a goal of global economic competitiveness.' As
examples, Raffensperger cites a relative lack of National Institutes of
Healthspending on allergenicity and the environmental consequences of
biotechnology, compared with funding for the development of transgenic
products and cancer medicines. 'Our public dollars go toward developing more
drugs to treat cancer rather than doing some of the things necessary to
prevent cancer,' she complains."

I haven't used precisely these words, but the views I have expressed clearly
share this perspective.

So what led you to conclude that my advocacy of slowing down the pace of
introducing new technologies arose from the assumption that the next 100
years will be the same as the last 100 years; and the next billion years
will be like the last billion years?  That really was an outrageous,
unsupported attribution.

Because those are not my assumptions and there is nothing in what I wrote
that suggests they are, to me it looks like there was a disconnect in your
perception and thinking.  Did you see only what you _wanted_ to see?

Kaleopono