One of the key questions of our time. I could come up with a couple of highly unflattering (to the Greens) answers to that question, but I will leave this to Tim Blair . I have written about this before . I will merely add that Norman Borlaug is a very great man.
"We need this. This serves a useful purpose," Borlaug says, rapping the table with a pen. "What's happened more and more, from my point of view, for the last seven or eight years since all of this biotechnology has been coming on, is that the gene for common sense and judgment has been eroded all to hell and it doesn't function anymore." Borlaug believes opposition to biotechnology stems more from fervent anti-corporate ideology than concern for human health or the environment.
Where does this anti-science, anti-technology activism come from, precisely? Why, when on issues like food production you can come up with stunningly good news, do you get such hostility to it? We get fervent anti-corporate rhetoric from people who claim they want to help people in the poor world, and yet they are opposed to technology that is the only thing that can feed the poor world. This is quite simply obscene.
(I do wish though that Glenn Reynolds would stop taking cheap shots at the Nobel Peace Prize Committee. The committee gives the prize to someone genuinely admirable more often than not, and the good done by giving it to the right people (Aung San Suu Kyi, Desmond Tutu, even Andrei Sakharov, just to give three that immediately come to mind - there are plenty more) outweighs the fairly minor harm of the occasions where they have got it wrong)).