The Door is Cracked Open, Jump Through Greenpeace!
This morning I was fortunate to have breakfast with Mark Lynas in Belfast, Northern Ireland. He discussed his idea for a blog, based on the idea that 107 Nobel Laureates have asked Greenpeace to change their position on Golden Rice. He prepared a nice piece with a quick turnaround. It's here!
Go read that now if you haven't. I'll wait.
I could never put that so eloquently. So instead, I'll focus on the idea that changing one's mind is not a bad thing, and maybe Greepeace should do that. While politicians scream of "flip-flopping" and "waffling", in reality changing one's mind is an act of courage. It comes after a time evidence re-evaluation. It is a sign of growth, a sign of personal improvement.
Greenpeace is in a difficult spot. They do some things well and have a solid brand to inspire change. However, they are not taken seriously because of their denial of fundamental science, and their trashing of scientists. It is especially damaging when their science denial disadvantages those in impoverished nations that could benefit from the technology they block.
For Greenpeace to be sustainable they must grow with the times and move with the evidence.
Now is the time to do that.
Imagine if they said, "The 107 Nobelians are correct, and we've been rethinking this position for a long time... while we still do not agree with multinational companies and note clear ecological impacts of GM crops, we side with science in stating that there are no known health effects of these technologies, and that they may even be helpful in combating nutritional deficiency, land lost to changing climate, and in fighting ever changing pests and pathogens."
Imagine if they said that. The world would give them a pass on the regressive former stance, and applaud their acceptance of science. Their credibility would soar, and dollars would roll in, and their perception as an anti-science organization would dissipate a bit.
The door is cracked open. Jump through, Greenpeace. The spotlight is on you, and what you choose to do in response to the 107 signatories may just re-define the trajectory of your organization.
Go read that now if you haven't. I'll wait.
I could never put that so eloquently. So instead, I'll focus on the idea that changing one's mind is not a bad thing, and maybe Greepeace should do that. While politicians scream of "flip-flopping" and "waffling", in reality changing one's mind is an act of courage. It comes after a time evidence re-evaluation. It is a sign of growth, a sign of personal improvement.
Head toward the light!!
Greenpeace is in a difficult spot. They do some things well and have a solid brand to inspire change. However, they are not taken seriously because of their denial of fundamental science, and their trashing of scientists. It is especially damaging when their science denial disadvantages those in impoverished nations that could benefit from the technology they block.
For Greenpeace to be sustainable they must grow with the times and move with the evidence.
Now is the time to do that.
Imagine if they said, "The 107 Nobelians are correct, and we've been rethinking this position for a long time... while we still do not agree with multinational companies and note clear ecological impacts of GM crops, we side with science in stating that there are no known health effects of these technologies, and that they may even be helpful in combating nutritional deficiency, land lost to changing climate, and in fighting ever changing pests and pathogens."
Imagine if they said that. The world would give them a pass on the regressive former stance, and applaud their acceptance of science. Their credibility would soar, and dollars would roll in, and their perception as an anti-science organization would dissipate a bit.
The door is cracked open. Jump through, Greenpeace. The spotlight is on you, and what you choose to do in response to the 107 signatories may just re-define the trajectory of your organization.
