Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
1–10 of 200 posts
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#2This looks like an opinion piece disguised as objective reporting. There's just enough factual information to make it seem credible but the author is clearly taking sides. For example, the article characterizes people with environmental concerns as "anti-science" yet there's no evidence presented to support this point of view.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#3This looks like an opinion piece disguised as objective reporting. There's just enough factual information to make it seem credible but the author is clearly taking sides. For example, the article characterizes people with environmental concerns as "anti-science" yet there's no evidence presented to support this point of view.
It does sound a little subjective but then the following seems like it really happened, which definitely looks like being anti-science:
> In June, some parliamentarians formally deposited documents at the Senate, one of Italy’s two houses of parliament, which challenged the scientific evidence on which Xylella management plans have been based and called for a Senate inquiry into whether scientists have misled the public. These claims were repudiated the following month, in an independent analysis commissioned by the national science academy, the Accademia dei Lincei. The Senate has not yet acted on the call for an inquiry.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#4The easiest way to ensure that people listen is to do nothing and let all the olive trees in Italy die. I presume at that point people will pay attention.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#5The easiest way to ensure that people listen is to do nothing and let all the olive trees in Italy die. I presume at that point people will pay attention.
They will not, they will just find a convenient scapegoat.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#6This looks like an opinion piece disguised as objective reporting. There's just enough factual information to make it seem credible but the author is clearly taking sides. For example, the article characterizes people with environmental concerns as "anti-science" yet there's no evidence presented to support this point of view.
It does sound a little subjective but then the following seems like it really happened, which definitely looks like being anti-science: > In June, some parliamentarians formally deposited documents at the Senate, one of Italy’s two houses of parliament, which challenged the scientific evidence on which Xylella management plans have been based and called for a Senate inquiry into whether scientists have misled the pub…
that action isn't intrinsically anti-science. It depends on the objection that the counterparty has raised - if their objections are legitimate or just based in conspiracy. If the results cannot be defended without resorting to an appeal to authority then that is more anti-science than challenging the work itself.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does sound a little subjective but then the following seems like it really happened, which definitely looks like being anti-science: > In June, some parliamentarians formally deposited documents at the Senate, one of Italy’s two houses of parliament, which challenged the scientific evidence on which Xylella management plans have been based and called for a Senate inquiry into whether scientists have misled the pub…
that action isn't intrinsically anti-science. It depends on the objection that the counterparty has raised - if their objections are legitimate or just based in conspiracy. If the results cannot be defended without resorting to an appeal to authority then that is more anti-science than challenging the work itself.
"These claims were repudiated the following month, in an independent analysis". It was anti-science populism (and it was actually worse than this retelling makes it look).
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#8This looks like an opinion piece disguised as objective reporting. There's just enough factual information to make it seem credible but the author is clearly taking sides. For example, the article characterizes people with environmental concerns as "anti-science" yet there's no evidence presented to support this point of view.
Well not wanting to use /any/ insecticidal measures I think qualifies. One can rightfully argue about the specific chemicals while agreeing using something to contain outbreaks is needed.
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#9> If found guilty, Italy could, for example, lose access to important agricultural subsidies.
That will help ...
Re: Italy’s olive crisis intensifies as deadly tree disease spreads
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
that action isn't intrinsically anti-science. It depends on the objection that the counterparty has raised - if their objections are legitimate or just based in conspiracy. If the results cannot be defended without resorting to an appeal to authority then that is more anti-science than challenging the work itself.
"These claims were repudiated the following month, in an independent analysis". It was anti-science populism (and it was actually worse than this retelling makes it look).
the claims being repudiated doesn't make it anti-science either. However, I'm not denying that it could be anti-science, and it sounds like you know more about this than is written in TFA.