Yup, this is what happens when all the work put forward by an activist and her accredited cohorts meets the larger world of academia and natural science - they are rebutted and dismissed.
This is a crock CK. Morton is member of academia and her papers she has co-written with other accredited scientists are peer reviewed by those in academia. There are no rebuttals and dismissals of those papers as you claim. They were published in reputable journals. Once again you never supply any links to scientific papers supporting your false statements.
Then, supporters like you guys are left with the inevitable response of blaming Harper and comparing aquaculture to the tobacco industry.
You are being deliberately obtuse by confusing two issues. This is your stock –in-trade isn’t it? No one is comparing the tobacco industry with your industry in terms of the human suffering and misery it created and defended, even though there are health issue with salmon feedlot products. We are talking about the denial, obfuscation, mis-representations and character assassination METHODS used by the tobacco industry in an attempt to discredit whistle blowers and opponents.
These METHODS are very well demonstrated by the following quotes from you which I reject and rebut completely.
So where is Morton qualified in any way to speculate on fish pathology, virology or any of the other topics she routinely bloviates about?
As far as I can tell the only reason she had her name on any of those papers is because she went out and caught the fish.
CK your ignorance of how science works is showing again. Morton did not write those papers single- handedly. She collaborated with other qualified scientists in various fields to produce those papers AND those papers were peer reviewed by other scientists BEFORE being accepted for publishing. That is why all the knowledgeable people on here accept those results. Your simple minded PR statements go through no such scrutiny.
That is not 7 different labs.
So now it comes down to the number of labs. How childish.!How about actually looking at what a number of labs actually found and doing some more research in those areas? Again these are science labs run by qualified people. I believe them and not the unethical corporate interest that you so gleefully support to your great shame and discredit.
How much of the funding she has recieved has gone to enhancement or habitat restoration? Things that would actually benefit wild salmon?
Trying to suggest money should spent elsewhere is a diversionary tactic and value judgement that has no relevance to this discussion.
How much has gone towards testing? (If you have more than 10 samples you can get them tested for 5 targets for less than $150 - Shipping would be extra, so depending on where they go it might cost a few bucks) [
How much money has been spent will be known in due time. Where you get your numbers from I don’t know (you NEVER publish your sources) but I doubt DNA sequencing can be done for $150.
Where are all the lab reports? Shouldn't she have something to show her supporters for all the money they have donated? [
Ignorance of science again. The process of gathering data, writing papers and having them peer reviewed and published takes many months and sometimes a year or two! Data will be forthcoming, I have no doubt although the Government and your industry is doing its best to block that effort by shutting down accredited labs and firing or muzzling scientists.
How much has gone towards her film and road-show? ( I heard that Twyla got $10,000 for the 'documentary') She sure travels a lot... [
That is a mean and nasty insinuation. Typical of you and your industry. Not even worth talking to you on this contemptible attack.
HIt almost seems like an enviro-ponzi scheme - Get enough to raise the fear level to a point where people will open their wallets enough to elevate the propaganda to a higher level with a film and then use the funds recieved to promote the film and raise more funds to do more promotion...
There are cynics on both sides of the fence.
Now you are getting crazy. Are you going to accuse Morton of being an international arms dealer next! Ponzi scheme indeed - gimme a break. CK sometimes you are totally ridiculous. More so recently.
This thread is titled "alex morton"
What better place to come and ask questions about Alexandra Morton?
You guys can praise her virtues and fawn over her accolades and accomplishments and those who see her in a different light can put forward their thoughts, questions and concerns. .
So you treat the title as your green light to attack her credentials and integrity. The “questions” you ask are all about her personally and not about the proven science which she and many other have published.
You are using these despicable tactics because you cannot understand and have no defence against the science which exposes your fabrications.
She repeatedly said there were 7 labs finding segements - my count has not gotten past, at best, 5.
Why is that a big deal?
And you cannot see why the actual number is unimportant and the results those labs got is in fact the real issue. THAT is the big deal. Maybe you can but you keep focusing on irrelevant details to obscure and raise doubt. Typical tobacco industry- like tactics!
Well it seems to follow a trend of making unsupported, or entirely incorrect statements and never providing an explanation, or correction.
Very strange that comment coming form you CK who NEVER posts any scientific support for your position and your completely incorrect statements!
I'm not here trying to dispute her use of data, or rebutting her findings (of the papers she has co-authored) - there are qualified people out there who have and continue to do that.
Nope once again no support for this false statement. Where are the rebuttals of her and her co-workers’ findings? Where are the papers proving all the past data conclusion from Morton and many other scientists wrong and that all is well with the open net pen feed lot industry?
All I am saying is that there is a lot that does not add up on her end, she has made statements that are clearly wrong and yet she continues to misprepresent the science involved (possibly due to her lack of training) in her campaign to end salmon farming in BC. (Just in BC mind you, not Washington State, or not anything to do with the 6 billion cultured salmon smolts that are raised in net pens in Alaska and released to compete with wild stocks)
You of all people CK are not fit to judge that it “does not add up”. And you keep ignoring the fact that many other scientists besides Morton have published data that documents severe problems with your industry. You keep attacking her because she is in the public eye, exposes your industry for what it is, and because you are that kind of person.
I had no problem giving my academic pedigree when asked, I am not anonymous on here (especially recently) and I stand behind what I say and the questions I ask.
And I and many hundreds of scientists and thousands of citizens stand by what we say and the criticisms we have of your terrible industry.
The ridiculous part IMHO is where the matter of credentials can be swung around and then the fact that Morton has absolutlely no training whatsoever in virology, or anything to do with fish health is completely ignored.
The ridiculous part IMHO is you keep using this credentials issue to attack Morton, when SHE DID NOT WORK ALONE and there are many other scientists who who have published papers on the ecological and environmental effects of your industry. In making your false and disrespectful claims you are attacking all of science and the research and publishing process because you are attacking everyone associated with it. Your look totally ignorant and foolish doing that CK.
Here is just one paper from that big list I posted. It is not by Morton. It was published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society, one of the most prestigious science journals existing in the UK.
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/276/1672/3385.short
So go ahead and enlighten us CK on where the actual science is wrong. Where is the rebuttal of the actual data and conclusions of this paper and where/when was it published. You really cannot can you….but that won’t stop you going into tobacco industry mode with some sort or obfuscation or denial.
You are really exposed for what you are by your own posts on here CK.