...is always a good idea and just can't happen often enough.
This just in from the UK (no doubt because, though the findings come from Kansas, you know, the US media is utterly FUBAR. The Great GM Crop Myth gets busted.
Curiously, I don't beleve the University of Kansas (aka KU) has a Department of Agronomy; that's the sort of program that would be at it's rival school (and my graduate degree alma mater) Kansas State University (aka KSU).
A quick check of the KU website shows no agronomy, though a keyword search turns up plenty of references to work at KSU.
Indeed, the professor named is on the KSU faculty.
My point was that it seemed odd to focus on the error of some hapless Indy sub in confusing the U of Kansas with Kansas State University -- fairly easy to do when you're several thousand miles away because Kansas seems, frankly, a bit unimportant at that distance -- and use that trivial error as an excuse to ignore the main burden of the article. As the good prof's cited paper demonstrates, the Indy is in no way misrepresenting his general tenor.
and, I agree completely. if I seemed petulant, it's likely due variously to 1) the longstanding rivalry that exists between KU and KSU, 2) my own bias from academia for proper citations, 3) my desire to tweak Greg (just for the fun of it) 4) my own experience from far too many interviews where the journalist got point after point flat out wrong.
but, you're absolutely right, the main points do seem to hold up.
MN nutrient addingfrostokovichApril 21 2008, 21:53:53 UTC
So, if I read this right, the GM soybeans have to have an extra helping of manganese to equal the standard, organic soybean yield. This would seem to me the farming equivalent of having to feed antibiotics to cattle because our fabulous cattle industry makes them eat nearly indigestible corn instead of what they ought to be eating. I'll wait to hear if we will have to give the plants something else to offset the side effects of the additional manganese.
A quick check of the KU website shows no agronomy, though a keyword search turns up plenty of references to work at KSU.
Indeed, the professor named is on the KSU faculty.
So... what else did they get wrong, hmmm?
Reply
You might want to glance at, for example, http://www.ppi-ppic.org/ppiweb/bcrops.nsf/$webindex/70ABDB50A75463F085257394001B157F/$file/07-4p12.pdf.
Reply
This is just further confirmation that Gordon is at KSU and not KU.
Or were you tring to make a different point?
Reply
My point was that it seemed odd to focus on the error of some hapless Indy sub in confusing the U of Kansas with Kansas State University -- fairly easy to do when you're several thousand miles away because Kansas seems, frankly, a bit unimportant at that distance -- and use that trivial error as an excuse to ignore the main burden of the article. As the good prof's cited paper demonstrates, the Indy is in no way misrepresenting his general tenor.
Reply
and, I agree completely. if I seemed petulant, it's likely due variously to
1) the longstanding rivalry that exists between KU and KSU,
2) my own bias from academia for proper citations,
3) my desire to tweak Greg (just for the fun of it)
4) my own experience from far too many interviews where the journalist got point after point flat out wrong.
but, you're absolutely right, the main points do seem to hold up.
Reply
Reply
"a report for a quality UK daily "
Oops -- "a reporter for a quality UK daily", that should be.
Reply
I'll wait to hear if we will have to give the plants something else to offset the side effects of the additional manganese.
g
Reply
Sort of like the song "There's a Hole in My Bucket", isn't it?
Reply
Leave a comment