Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[alwaysfishn]

Now that is funny. You acknowledge that you don't know the subject well enough to discuss it, but at the same time, are convinced you have all the right answers and prove it by attacking the bearers of dissenting messages and making up your own facts where required.

This situation has blown up precisely because politics and money are attempting to displace and discredit the science that doesn't provide the conclusion the interest groups would like it to. The argument appears to be that because the scientific method doesn't support the conclusions we have already drawn, we should disregard the scientific approach. For all of the noise and the attempts at management of public opinion to the contrary, the science can't conclude that the disease is present and can't yet be certain about the origin and nature of the virus that has been showing up in ghost positives. The public is being sold a bill of goods that can't be substantiated in an organized campaign by a well funded lobby.

What you don't appear to understand is that the science is never irrelevant; that without it the problem will never be defined and understood. What you are being told by those reactionaries you support is that science is cut and dried, that there is never disagreement so someone must be lying. What is really happening is that the state of the knowledge is being refined and expanded and the truth is being defined by hypothesis and experiment. The problem will never be solved by activist campaigns pushing erroneous solutions based on incomplete knowledge and premature conclusions and anyone who claims differently either doesn't understand reality or is a liar.

Fairness isn't an issue with your posts and you can spend as much time being an ankle-biter as you choose. The rest of us, or at least most of the rest of us, will stick to dealing with the subject without having to reduce the level of the discussion to one you can function on.

Your whole argument reminds me of the tobacco argument.

The tobacco companies still insist that their science proves that tobacco is not harmful and that it is not addictive. They have presented their evidence numerous times in court. The science becomes irrelevant when there is no political will to make changes.

I personally believe nicotine is both harmful and addictive even though I don't understand the science behind it. Thankfully activists are influencing change to the point where politicians are setting policies that limit exposure to second hand smoke.

[aquapaloosa]

Its the old tobacco comparison again.  For the love of god I hope you are cuttin and copying that one by now.  We have seen it so many times.  Its pretty standard activist statement and it is so old obviously not a contending argument.   You pull it out like its you ace up your sleeve but it just is so see through.  
I know you think your fightin the good fight but at lest come up with something new once and a while.



Dont forget to donate.

[alwaysfishn]

Its the old tobacco comparison again.  For the love of god I hope you are cuttin and copying that one by now.  We have seen it so many times.  Its pretty standard activist statement and it is so old obviously not a contending argument.   You pull it out like its you ace up your sleeve but it just is so see through.   
I know you think your fightin the good fight but at lest come up with something new once and a while.

Dont forget to donate.

  Now that is a funny post! Thanks. 

[Sandy]

and as if DFO's -CFIA's credability or impartiality was not in question, it sure as hell is now.

http://news.ca.msn.com/local/britishcolumbia/government-email-makes-waves-at-salmon-inquiry-78

[chris gadsden]

and as if DFO's -CFIA's credability or impartiality was not in question, it sure as hell is now.

http://news.ca.msn.com/local/britishcolumbia/government-email-makes-waves-at-salmon-inquiry-78

Thanks for posting, I wonder how some will now try to dispute this evidence of an attempted cover up.

[chris gadsden]

John Werring of David Suzuki Foundarion at Cohen on Friday.

http://youtu.be/N_wSCYVtaIc

[absolon]

Your whole argument reminds me of the tobacco argument.

The tobacco companies still insist that their science proves that tobacco is not harmful and that it is not addictive. They have presented their evidence numerous times in court. The science becomes irrelevant when there is no political will to make changes.

I personally believe nicotine is both harmful and addictive even though I don't understand the science behind it. Thankfully activists are influencing change to the point where politicians are setting policies that limit exposure to second hand smoke.

Your analogy doesn't stand up to scrutiny. There is more than sufficient scientific and clinical evidence to irrefutably link cigarette smoke to high mortality from cancer. The only place that evidence linking BC salmon farms to any serious problem exists is in the minds of the reactionaries, and it is neither clinical nor scientific. There has to be a basis in fact to justify taking action. It is the only way one can discriminate between truth and agenda driven activism. That basis comes from establishing facts rationally and scientifically, not from emotionally driven, uninformed public opinion.

[absolon]

and as if DFO's -CFIA's credability or impartiality was not in question, it sure as hell is now.

http://news.ca.msn.com/local/britishcolumbia/government-email-makes-waves-at-salmon-inquiry-78

What do you expect?

Morton chose the venue, a public relations war, when she and Routledge, rather than reporting the results of their tests to the CFIA for confirmation as required by law, instead held a press conference and announced to the world that ISA had been found in BC and was brought there by salmon farming.
She then leaked the unconfirmed results of another set of tests to an associate who provided them to the New York Times for publication in spite of being ordered not to, again claiming that ISA had been found in BC and was brought there by salmon farms. Included in the campaign were the usual unsubstantiated allegations of incompetence, bias and dishonesty against the DFO. At no point in her campaign did she acknowledge that the results were unconfirmed, that scientific accuracy required confirmation or that rather than there being evidence that the virus came from farms, there was evidence that it likely hadn't.

The DFO was successful in countering the campaign by presenting evidence based on further testing. That testing was scientific and based on the world wide protocol for testing and was repeated in several labs. I'm not sure what the issue is when someone at the DFO identifies the campaign being waged against them as exactly what it is and that they express satisfaction that they were able to counter it by presenting scientific evidence.

It's a bit of a stretch to call that bias and evidence of lack of impartiality

[alwaysfishn]

Your analogy doesn't stand up to scrutiny. There is more than sufficient scientific and clinical evidence to irrefutably link cigarette smoke to high mortality from cancer. The only place that evidence linking BC salmon farms to any serious problem exists is in the minds of the reactionaries, and it is neither clinical nor scientific. There has to be a basis in fact to justify taking action. It is the only way one can discriminate between truth and agenda driven activism. That basis comes from establishing facts rationally and scientifically, not from emotionally driven, uninformed public opinion.

The analogy is valid.  You will not find any tobacco companies admitting their product causes harm, probably because it would admit their liability.  This is in spite of scientific evidence to the contrary. Take the tobacco issue back as little as 15 years when there was limited science proving nicotine caused harm. Many were convinced it was harmful and lobbied to have it identified as such. They were not willing to wait for the science to confirm what they were certain was a problem.

Another example is asbestos. Canada has outlawed all asbestos for use in Canada yet they continue to export it to countries that don't have those laws. This is also in spite of the science that proves it is harmful!

The point of my analogy was to illustrate that an in depth knowledge of a particular science is not the only thing you need in order to be able to contribute to a discussion. A simple application of common sense and logic is sufficient.

Logic and common sense suggest the salmon feedlots are harmful to wild salmon. Waiting till DFO and the fish farms admit the same thing will not likely happen and if it does it may be too late for the wild salmon.

Hopefully more folks will participate in this discussion even if they only have common sense to contribute.

[alwaysfishn]

Morton chose the venue, a public relations war, when she and Routledge, rather than reporting the results of their tests to the CFIA for confirmation as required by law, instead held a press conference and announced to the world that ISA had been found in BC and was brought there by salmon farming.
She then leaked the unconfirmed results of another set of tests to an associate who provided them to the New York Times for publication in spite of being ordered not to, again claiming that ISA had been found in BC and was brought there by salmon farms. Included in the campaign were the usual unsubstantiated allegations of incompetence, bias and dishonesty against the DFO. At no point in her campaign did she acknowledge that the results were unconfirmed, that scientific accuracy required confirmation or that rather than there being evidence that the virus came from farms, there was evidence that it likely hadn't.

The DFO was successful in countering the campaign by presenting evidence based on further testing. That testing was scientific and based on the world wide protocol for testing and was repeated in several labs. I'm not sure what the issue is when someone at the DFO identifies the campaign being waged against them as exactly what it is and that they express satisfaction that they were able to counter it by presenting scientific evidence.

Show me some evidence that anything that Morton or Rutledge did was against the law! If anything they did was against the law, they would have been charged. That's how the laws work in Canada....   

What they did was make the public aware of the virus that is present in the Pacific waters. A virus that has devastated fish farms in Chile and Norway. It's something that any concerned citizen would do given the knowledge that Morton and Rutledge have.

The bias and dishonesty that is present at DFO is obvious as the internal email leaked to the press illustrates: "It is clear that we are turning the PR tide in our favour, and this is because of the very successful performance of our spokes at the tech briefing," CFIA B.C. manager Joseph Beres wrote. "One battle is won, now we have to nail the surveillance piece, and we will win the war, also."

That email illustrates that their "war" is to convince the public that there isn't any problem, rather than focusing on ensuring that there is no problem. Part of their campaign has been to discredit the analysis of 2 very qualified scientists without so much as an explanation as to why their results differed from CFIA's tests.

This is why the public has every right to question their credibility on any scientific tests that either DFO or CFIA are supposedly conducting.

[absolon]

The analogy is valid.  You will not find any tobacco companies admitting their product causes harm, probably because it would admit their liability.  This is in spite of scientific evidence to the contrary. Take the tobacco issue back as little as 15 years when there was limited science proving nicotine caused harm. Many were convinced it was harmful and lobbied to have it identified as such. They were not willing to wait for the science to confirm what they were certain was a problem.

Another example is asbestos. Canada has outlawed all asbestos for use in Canada yet they continue to export it to countries that don't have those laws. This is also in spite of the science that proves it is harmful!

The point of my analogy was to illustrate that an in depth knowledge of a particular science is not the only thing you need in order to be able to contribute to a discussion. A simple application of common sense and logic is sufficient.

Logic and common sense suggest the salmon feedlots are harmful to wild salmon. Waiting till DFO and the fish farms admit the same thing will not likely happen and if it does it may be too late for the wild salmon.

Hopefully more folks will participate in this discussion even if they only have common sense to contribute.

But the critical point is that the tobacco companies don't set the policy. Government does, and it does so based on scientific and clinical evidence that irrefutably establish the harm done by tobacco use.

Anyone is a welcome participant in a discussion provided they are prepared to both listen and contribute instead of trying to shout down all opposition. Snide personal remarks aren't a successful way to convince people of anything.

[Every Day]

What they did was make the public aware of the virus that is present in the Pacific waters. A virus that has devastated fish farms in Chile and Norway. It's something that any concerned citizen would do given the knowledge that Morton and Rutledge have.

2 points here.

1) Devastated FISH FARMS, not wild salmon. Not to say that it won't, but I once again think the farms are more at risk here than wild pacific's.

2) A virus that may not be (and probably isn't) the same as the ones in Norway and Chile. Virus' have many different strains, they have already found 5 different strains of ISA, including one that is none pathogenic (none disease causing). I am convinced this one has been here for as long as salmon have been around, it's just never been tested for since it doesn't seem to be a strain that causes disease (why test for something that isn't hurting anything). Its just Morton and the activists that need something new since they are definitely losing the battle.

That email illustrates that their "war" is to convince the public that there isn't any problem, rather than focusing on ensuring that there is no problem. Part of their campaign has been to discredit the analysis of 2 very qualified scientists without so much as an explanation as to why their results differed from CFIA's tests.

It really quite annoys me when people say this and take this as true fact. I guess everyone just likes to ignore the truth though. The fact that Morton has a degree in JOURNALISM, just because someone gives her a honorary PHd doesn't mean she is a scientist, in fact it doesn't even mean she knows how to do proper sampling (as seen in pics posted earlier) or proper testing. She sure as hell knows how to write well enough to capture a large audience and make them believe what she wants them to.

Routledge also, not a scientist (although closer). Last time I checked, making math models without proper data to input wasn't science. True he is a brilliant statistic/mathematician, but he also doesn't know much about salmon.

[chris gadsden]

Dr Craig Orr.
http://youtu.be/Jf1SPvy6E4M

[absolon]

Show me some evidence that anything that Morton or Rutledge did was against the law! If anything they did was against the law, they would have been charged. That's how the laws work in Canada....   

What they did was make the public aware of the virus that is present in the Pacific waters. A virus that has devastated fish farms in Chile and Norway. It's something that any concerned citizen would do given the knowledge that Morton and Rutledge have.

The bias and dishonesty that is present at DFO is obvious as the internal email leaked to the press illustrates: "It is clear that we are turning the PR tide in our favour, and this is because of the very successful performance of our spokes at the tech briefing," CFIA B.C. manager Joseph Beres wrote. "One battle is won, now we have to nail the surveillance piece, and we will win the war, also."

That email illustrates that their "war" is to convince the public that there isn't any problem, rather than focusing on ensuring that there is no problem. Part of their campaign has been to discredit the analysis of 2 very qualified scientists without so much as an explanation as to why their results differed from CFIA's tests.

This is why the public has every right to question their credibility on any scientific tests that either DFO or CFIA are supposedly conducting.

Nobody has discredited the scientists or their analysis. Kibenge's results weren't repeatable and he couldn't isolate the virus. He admitted as much. Miller obtained her results with a test that has not yet been established to be accurate or reliable. She admitted as much. In such cases, the results can't be interpreted to mean what someone wants them to mean. They must be interpreted as inconclusive and that is exactly what was done. The door is open for someone to present repeatable results and isolate the virus and for Miller to prove the reliability and repeatability of her tests, but until that is done the presence of the virus is not confirmed.

[chris gadsden]

Please find enclosed a press update including:

 

"What's Cohen On?" (Superheroes 4 Salmon, 17th December): http://www.superheroes4salmon.org/blog/what’s-cohen

 

"Joseph Beres, CFIA: "we are turning the PR tide to our favour"" (Salmon Warriors, 17th December): http://salmonwarriors.blogspot.com/2011/12/joseph-beres-cfia-we-are-turning-pr.html?mid=5572285

 

"Fishyleaks IV: Transcript from Day 1 of the ISA hearing at the Cohen Commission" (Fishyleaks, 17th December): http://www.superheroes4salmon.org/fishyleaks

 

"Government email makes waves at salmon inquiry" (CBC News, 17th December): http://www.cbc.ca/m/rich/canada/story/2011/12/17/bc-cohen-commission-salmon.html

 

"Cohen Commission; DFO unqualified, ineffective, secretive, backward, resistive and uncooperative" (You Tube, 17th December): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_wSCYVtaIc

 

"Cohen Commission Reveals ISA Found in Canadian Genetically Engineered Fish" (You Tube, 17th December): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVh4TRey0OE

 

"Scottish salmon in Co-op Christmas food scare" (The Press & Journal, 17th December): http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/2562010

 

"The Canadian Fish Health Agency wins the war .... against us" (Alexandra Morton, 16th December): http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2011/12/the-canadian-fish-health-agency-wins-the-war-against-us.html

 

"SALMONGATE! Testimony today and yesterday at Cohen Commission demonstrating DFO and Canada Food Inspection Agency willingly hiding salmon disease from public" (The Salmon Guy, 16th December): http://www.salmonguy.org/?p=4710

 

"Cohen Aquaculture Daily" (Watershed Watch, 16th December): http://www.watershed-watch.org/2011/12/cohen-aquaculture-daily-december-16-2011/

 

"New York Times and others reporting on ISA issue and Cohen Commission special hearings" (The Salmon Guy, 16th December): http://www.salmonguy.org/?p=4701

 

"Cohen Commission hears explosive testimony on salmon disease" (The Tyee, 16th December): http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Environment/2011/12/16/salmon_disease/

 

"Federal agency accused of intimidation over salmon disease" (The Globe & Mail, 16th December): http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/bc-politics/federal-agency-accused-of-intimidation-over-salmon-disease/article2274509/

 

"Salmon virus find, bad for job security/Findings of virus in BC salmon brought government pressure: scientists" (Castanet/Canadian Press/Global News, 16th December): http://www.castanet.net/news/Canada/68616/Salmon-virus-find-bad-for-job-security

 

"Pacific salmon virus fears may be overblown, Canadian scientists say" (Alaska Dispatch, 16th December): http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/pacific-salmon-virus-fears-may-be-overblown-canadian-scientists-say

 

"Cohen Commission ISA Bombshell" (You Tube, 16th December): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdrS6nsI2Ls

 

"Deadly HSMI virus found on BC fish farm" (You Tube, 16th December): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpwBcKqpN2E

 

"Genetically engineered salmon grilled at Senate Commerce hearing" (Friends of the Earth, 16th December): http://www.foe.org/news/blog/2011-12-genetically-engineered-salmon-grilled-at-senate-comm

"ISA: Explosive Evidence Inaugurates Cohen Reconvening" (Pacific Free Press, 16th December): http://www.pacificfreepress.com/news/1/10449-isa-explosive-evidence-inaugurates-cohen-reconvening.html

 

"Salmon farm receives BAP certification" (FIS, 15th December): http://www.fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?l=e&country=0&special=&monthyear=&day=&id=48532&ndb=1&df=0

 

"Alexandra Morton on CBC News" (CBC News/Salmon Are Sacred, 15th December): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0hIZ96_Y04&feature=youtu.be   

 

 

Note the final day of the ISA hearing at the Cohen Commission is on Monday 19th December (9am start) - details online here

 

Follow via Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=812895354&ref=tn_tnmn#!/events/263406340380314/

 

 

Read the leaked a transcript of Day 1 and a Canadian Government report detailing over 100 positive tests for ISA in farmed Atlantic and wild Pacific salmon – online via 'Fishyleaks'

 

More details via "Chronology of a Cover-Up in Canada: ISA in British Columbia"

 

For background on the global spread of ISA read "ISA: Diary of Disease Disaster" and "Fish Farmageddon: The Infectious Salmon Aquacalypse" – online via:  http://www.wildsalmonfirst.org/fish-farmageddon-infectious-salmon-aquacalypse

 

 

Best fishes,

 

Don