Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Monsanto Co. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan Spillane who wrote (1344)	2/24/1999 2:03:00 AM
From: Anthony Wong	Respond to of 2539

The "bad science" letter from Fellows of the Royal Society to the Daily Telegraph: Don't believe all 'scientific' claims SIR We, Fellows of the Royal Society, believe that the time is right to bring good science into the centre of decision-making and focus on its impact in our increasingly technologically-driven world. In many of the major policy issues that confront us today - global food security, energy needs, environmental conservation, climate change - it is impossible to make wise decisions without reference to the underpinning science. Three consequences follow: You need good scientists for decision-makers to consult. The United Kingdom is therefore fortunate in having an exceptionally strong scientific community with the Royal Society promoting excellence in science. Decision makers must, and increasingly do, recognise when they are dealing with a science-related issue. We all need to distinguish good science from bad science. It is a dangerous mistake, vividly illustrated by the events of the past week concerning genetically modified foods, to assume that all statements claiming to be scientific can be taken at face value. Good science is work that has stood up to detailed scrutiny by independent workers in the field and contributes to new knowledge and understanding. Those who start telling the media about alleged scientific results that have not first been thoroughly scrutinised and exposed to the scientific community serve only to mislead, with potentially very damaging consequences. Prof BRIAN HEAP Prof PATRICK BATESON Sir ERIC ASH Prof ROY ANDERSON Sir ALAN COOK Sir ROGER ELLIOTT Prof WILLIAM HILL Prof LOUISE JOHNSON Sir JOHN KINGMAN Prof PETER LACHMANN Dr PAUL NURSE Prof LINDA PARTRIDGE Dr MAX PERUTZ Professor Sir MARTIN REES Sir RICHARD SOUTHWOOD Sir JOHN MEURIG THOMAS Prof Sir GHILLEAN PRANCE Earl of SELBORNE Prof ROBERT WHITE London SW1 dailytelegraph.co.uk:80/dt?ac=000659276559150&rtmo=lwklvFbt&atmo=lwklvFbt&pg=/99/2/23/ixdlett.html