Shiva

“throughout the 20th century it was considered that substitutes could be found for resources supplied by biodiversity: renewable source of us of energy-would an animal energy-could be replaced by fossil fuels; manure for growing food could be replaced by the products of fertilizer factories; and medicines could be made from synthetic molecules. But fossil fuels have given us climate change; agrochemicals have threatened species, undermined soil fertility, and human health; and synthetic drugs have had a fatal side effects.”

Wow. There’s so much wrong with this paragraph it’s hard to know where to start.

Climate change is a big problem, yes, but it’s hard to look at the industrial revolution and say that it was such a terrible thing because climate change. Maybe I’ll be swallowing my words when FGCU is 15 ft under water, but until then…
As an environmental engineering student, I have learned that the reason chemical fertilizers (which has given us the ability to feed enough people to lead to 7,000,000,000 of us, you’re welcome) cause so much environmental issues is because of misuse, and overuse. The gun is not dangerous unless in the wrong hands.
And the worst thing of all…fatal side effects from modern medicine? Are you freaking kidding me?? You know what would be worse than the occasional fatality from a synthetic drug? Polio! Smallpox! Cancer! This author is so incredibly ungrateful to what the 20th and 21st century has given her.


“Our ignorance of the ecological functions of diverse forms of life is no excuse for us to push species to extinction, or to manipulate them without concern for the ecological impact.”
I am very torn with this statement. On one hand, I am an environmentalist, and am horrified at the way man has irradiated species for the “greater good” and for the “cost of doing business.” However, as an engineer, I've seen first hand what genetic engineering can do. Are there risks? Yes. But science should never ever be limited because of potential risks. Algenol Biofuels is using genetically engineered algae to create gasoline and other types of oil through sustainable practices. Do I feel bad about the algae? No.

“The imperative to destroy diversity in order to increase productivity comes from my one-dimensional monocultural paradigm which fails to take the diverse functions of diverse species into account.”
This is something that I CAN support. And it brings to mind the millions of acres of corn that are grown in this country. Corn has ended up in virtually every processed food stuff that you can find in your grocery store. Yet the ignorance of the masses prevents anyone but select outsiders (more commonly known as “damn liberals”) to question and fight against this mono-culturing.

http://www.aei-ideas.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/11.16.12-Corn-Field.jpg

Overall, I give this segment of the book a C+. It's interesting, gives a lot of good facts, but is overall very one-sided and bias (like the rest of the book). And I'm an environmentalist, so that should tell you something.