Calgary Organic Food Delivery?

[carom]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

As far as your remarks on advanced technology used in today's agriculture and genetically modified crops, you should read up on a man named Norman Borlaug. Basically, his work has allowed crops to feed more people (higher yield), grow in far more unhospitable climates, and overall has done a lot to improve the food outlook for nations that aren't as fortunate as ours that can just go to the grocery store and buy whatever we want, organic or non.

I just wanted to reiterate the importance of Norman Borlaug and the influence he has had on our global society. The guy won the freakin nobel peace prize. This is what it said about it on wiki:

For his contributions to the world food supply, Borlaug was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. Norwegian officials notified his wife in Mexico City at 4:00 am, but Borlaug had already left for the test fields in the Toluca valley, about 40 miles (65 km) west of Mexico City. A chauffeur took her to the fields to inform her husband. According to his daughter, Jeanie Laube, "My mom said, 'You won the Nobel Peace Prize,' and he said, 'No, I haven't', ... It took some convincing ... He thought the whole thing was a hoax". He was awarded the prize on December 10. In his Nobel Lecture the following day, he speculated on his award: "When the Nobel Peace Prize Committee designated me the recipient of the 1970 award for my contribution to the 'green revolution', they were in effect, I believe, selecting an individual to symbolize the vital role of agriculture and food production in a world that is hungry, both for bread and for peace"

edit: his nobel lecture

[TorqueDog]

If there's one Nobel Prize winner I could say I truly agreed with (of the laureates I'm familiar with), Norman Borlaug is it. (No Barack Obama, I'm sure you're a great guy but getting elected is not a valid reason for being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.) Seems like it's become more of a popularity contest than anything else, which is unfortunate, because I think it's important to recognize those who make significant contributions to our world on a global scale.

Originally Posted by NuclearFart

And herein lies the problem with people like you, and why you all come across as flakes - you spout other people's anecdotal pseudoscience without having the ability (or desire) to properly critique/validate it. Have you ever gone to a library to properly research any of this stuff yourself?

Harsh but true. Any time I hear anecdotal evidence given as 'proof' of the efficacy of something (usually alternative medicine quackery), I feel like banging my head against a wall.

[moncton golden flames]

try to share what i know and i get run over by #######s for it. go #### yourselves!

[THE SCUD]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

try to share what I biasedly believe with no real support and i get run over by cpuckers for it. go love yourselves!

I tried to guess the ###'ed words based on the number of #'s - How'd I do?!

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

try to share what i know and i get run over by #######s for it. go #### yourselves!

You didn't get run over, you got questioned. If your stance can't stand up to critique, and relatively simple critique at that, you may want to start questioning the validity of your position.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by valo403

You didn't get run over, you got questioned. If your stance can't stand up to critique, and relatively simple critique at that, you may want to start questioning the validity of your position.

nothing will question the validity of my position, i know where i stand and why i stand here. sure, i was 'questioned', in the typical cp fashion, which is to jump all over somebody for having a different opinion or perspective. i shared what i had with me at the time. if you think you 'know more' than i do, good for you, give yourself a cookie. if it's all about being a hero in the internet, good luck, but i'm trying to make things better in real life.

truthfully, i have never even made my position public, so you don't really know where i stand.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

nothing will question the validity of my position, i know where i stand and why i stand here. sure, i was 'questioned', in the typical cp fashion, which is to jump all over somebody for having a different opinion or perspective. i shared what i had with me at the time. if you think you 'know more' than i do, good for you, give yourself a cookie. if it's all about being a hero in the internet, good luck, but i'm trying to make things better in real life.

truthfully, i have never even made my position public, so you don't really know where i stand.

You didn't? So dry humping Michael Pollan's leg for five pages was just so you could provide a counter-argument so we could have some sort of discourse? What a nice thing to do.


What you're saying is that, despite all the real evidence being placed in front of you, you're unwilling to change your position which is based on flawed reasoning and unscientific evidence. This is the definition of closed-mindedness.

"You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into." - Dr. Ben Goldacre

[Canuck-Hater]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Great, YouTube videos, just the sort of sources I wa-... no. Something I can read, please. Something that isn't looking to create an interesting video to get people on their side. Facts. Real research.

As far as your remarks on advanced technology used in today's agriculture and genetically modified crops, you should read up on a man named Norman Borlaug. Basically, his work has allowed crops to feed more people (higher yield), grow in far more unhospitable climates, and overall has done a lot to improve the food outlook for nations that aren't as fortunate as ours that can just go to the grocery store and buy whatever we want, organic or non.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Lawton

Seems like a credible source to me.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

You didn't? So dry humping Michael Pollan's leg for five pages was just so you could provide a counter-argument so we could have some sort of discourse? What a nice thing to do.


What you're saying is that, despite all the real evidence being placed in front of you, you're unwilling to change your position which is based on flawed reasoning and unscientific evidence. This is the definition of closed-mindedness.

"You cannot reason someone out of a position they did not reason themselves into." - Dr. Ben Goldacre

are you an engineer by chance?

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by Canuck-Hater

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoff_Lawton

Seems like a credible source to me.

easy now! if it's not on scientific graph paper, it can't be true!

geoff is amazing and the work he does, does not get the respect it deserves, because it's not the typical laboratory science, most square heads don't give permaculture the time of day.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Great, YouTube videos, just the sort of sources I wa-... no. Something I can read, please. Something that isn't looking to create an interesting video to get people on their side. Facts. Real research.

you want me to go thru your links, but won't take the time to look at mine? who's close minded?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

easy now! if it's not on scientific graph paper, it can't be true!

geoff is amazing and the work he does, does not get the respect it deserves, because it's not the typical laboratory science, most square heads don't give permaculture the time of day.

I don't think that's what being said at all. Just that maybe you're a little overboard by being religious about theories that haven't been concluded to be true (yet??) by using the scientific method (Which, let's face it, you're out there if you don't believe the scientific method as the best way of arriving at scientific truth).

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Gregory R. Ziegler, Ph.D, Professor of Food Sciences at Penn State: http://foodsci.wisc.edu/assets/FT-0508-PERSPECTIVE1.pdf
Professor John A. Lucey, Dept. of Food Sciences, U. Wisconsin-Madison: http://foodsci.wisc.edu/assets/Lucey%20Blog.pdf
Chris Hallquist, Biology Major, U. Wisconsin-Madison: http://www.uncrediblehallq.net/2009/...tion-a-review/

gregory r. ziegler - specializes in confectionary products, mainly chocolate.

john a. lucey - researches dairy, mainly milk proteins.

chris hallquist - is not a biology major, he has a masters of philospohy.

ziegler and lucey are experts in their field, i don't question that. but how do you translate a confectionary scientist and a dairy scientist into a full on 'food expert'?

as for hallquist, he is not a biology major like you stated, he has a masters in philosophy. is his degree in philosophy that much more valuable than a journalist like pollan, whose work you call 'tripe'?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

nothing will question the validity of my position, i know where i stand and why i stand here. sure, i was 'questioned', in the typical cp fashion, which is to jump all over somebody for having a different opinion or perspective. i shared what i had with me at the time. if you think you 'know more' than i do, good for you, give yourself a cookie. if it's all about being a hero in the internet, good luck, but i'm trying to make things better in real life.

truthfully, i have never even made my position public, so you don't really know where i stand.

You probably should have just left that last line out, since now I think your completely full of hot air. What have you been saying in this thread then? Someone elses stance?

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I don't think that's what being said at all. Just that maybe you're a little overboard by being religious about theories that haven't been concluded to be true (yet??) by using the scientific method (Which, let's face it, you're out there if you don't believe the scientific method as the best way of arriving at scientific truth).

i am not saying that scientific methods have no value, they absolutely do.

what i'm saying is a am witnessing and participating in a positive change in the way we can feed the world with safe and healthy food. anybody can rely on the scientific book knowledge, but if you can't apply that knowledge in the real world, what is the value of that book knowledge.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

gregory r. ziegler - specializes in confectionary products, mainly chocolate.

john a. lucey - researches dairy, mainly milk proteins.

chris hallquist - is not a biology major, he has a masters of philospohy.

ziegler and lucey are experts in their field, i don't question that. but how do you translate a confectionary scientist and a dairy scientist into a full on 'food expert'?

as for hallquist, he is not a biology major like you stated, he has a masters in philosophy. is his degree in philosophy that much more valuable than a journalist like pollan, whose work you call 'tripe'?

I'm not sure, because I don't know how you define "food expert" but I'm pretty sure I'd start by looking for someone who had an expertise in food, perhaps a professor of food science, as opposed to a journalist and activist.

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by valo403

I'm not sure, because I don't know how you define "food expert" but I'm pretty sure I'd start by looking for someone who had an expertise in food, perhaps a professor of food science, as opposed to a journalist and activist.

well, calling a dairy expert a food expert is like saying my mechanic is a car expert, but he only works on toyota's.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

i am not saying that scientific methods have no value, they absolutely do.

what i'm saying is a am witnessing and participating in a positive change in the way we can feed the world with safe and healthy food. anybody can rely on the scientific book knowledge, but if you can't apply that knowledge in the real world, what is the value of that book knowledge.

How are you applying scientific knowledge in the real world when the theories you have advanced are not actually sufficiently backed by scientific knowledge?

[moncton golden flames]

Originally Posted by valo403

You probably should have just left that last line out, since now I think your completely full of hot air. What have you been saying in this thread then? Someone elses stance?

to sum up my stance in one word: permaculture.

i entered the discussion because i wanted to know more about what people think of organics. imo, organics is a highjacked term that has the vanity of 'the right thing' but is more a form of save the world type marketing.

my food hierarchy: backyard > local > local organic (certified or not) > organic > conventional farming

[valo403]

Originally Posted by moncton golden flames

well, calling a dairy expert a food expert is like saying my mechanic is a car expert, but he only works on toyota's.

What does that making calling a journalist a food expert then? Is that like calling my milk man a mechanic, but he only works on cottage cheese?