|
FOE, Greenpeace and their Dubious Anti-Palm Oil Position |
|
|
|
Written by Frank Tate
|
|
Friday, 02 January 2009 |
 Environmentalists love to use scientific models to justify their positions and wild claims on climate change and global warming. Depending as they do on extensive guesswork about the ill-understood mechanisms and interactions involved in climate, and involving so many tunable parameters and feedback factors that they could produce any desired result by appropriate tweaking, these computer models are essentially not worth the paper they are printed on.
The putative experimental evidence is equally dubious. It all sounds very impressive and scary, but on close examination tends to dissolve like the morning mist in the light of the sun. It is only recently that a small troupe of volunteers with few resources has begun a serious audit of the claims. The much vaunted “high-quality” sensor network turns out to be ramshackle almost beyond belief; the processing of the data involves inapplicable methods, glaring errors and unexplained adjustments, which all mysteriously turn out to exaggerate the desired effect.
There is a morbid and obsessive secrecy among the practitioners that is quite contrary to the open nature of the scientific method, which prompts the question “What have they got to hide?” Details of publicly funded “research” are kept, quite illegally, from the public who fund it; and only the claimed results, inevitably apocalyptic, are exposed. Such data that have been wrested with great difficulty from their creators almost invariably turn out to be subject to serious dubiety.
So what else is new? Palm oil has been subject to such alarmist and scaremongering by environmental organizations such as the curiously named Greenpeace and the Friends of the Earth (FOE) who are both equally fond of apocalyptic pronouncements.
Wildly accusing palm oil of causing massive deforestation and contributing to global warming and thus, threatening the extinction of exotic animals in the wild such as the orang utan, both Greenpeace and the FOE are guilty of the glaring errors and dubious manipulation of data that is so all-pervasive with their ilk.
The trouble with Greenpeace and the FOE’s wild allegations is that palm oil is indisputably the most productive of all the oilseed crops, in fact so productive that one hectare of oil palm plantation can yield 4.5 metric tons of edible oil which is ten times higher than the competing oilseeds such as soy, rapeseed and sunflower. It is obvious then to any casual observer that there is something fundamentally wrong with Greenpeace and FOE’s allegations. The supreme productivity of palm oil means that palm oil requires 10 times LESS land to produce the same unit of oil as its competitors!
The high productivity and consequent competitive pricing probably explains why palm oil is so popular with and so highly rated by food manufacturers. On top of that palm oil happens to possess inherent healthful qualities as it is rich in heart healthy nutrients such as Co-Enzyme Q10, beta-carotenes and toco-trienols, a rare and superior form of Vitamin E.
Perhaps, it is this ultra-competitiveness that has attracted the flak and organized efforts by the likes of Greenpeace and FOE to rein it in palm oil and stop its expansion.
In the view of the Palm Oil Truth Foundation such a scenario may be plausible as both Greenpeace and the FOE have taken pains to emphasize that its is not palm oil per se that they are against, but it’s expansion! It is certainly food for thought considering the prevalence of lobby groups in the west from whence Greenpeace and FOE hails. The specter that both Greenpeace and the FOE are paid agents, paid to organize anti-palm oil campaigns to rein in palm oil and to stop its growth and its inexorable march into the International edible oil market is not too far fetched! THE END. |
The top officers of FOE and Greenpeace should be set on an ice floe off Alaska and pushed off to sea. They then have all the time in the world to shout out their 'apocalyptic pronouncements'!
Posted by D. Reyes, on January 11, 2009 at 7:15
Greenpeace, FOE and their co-hacks should all join in at the rear of the bus. That's where they belong after their ass-busting efforts to hoodwink us on palm oil!
Posted by Spud, on January 2, 2009 at 10:07
Tate is probably right that the ultra-competitiveness of palm oil is what has invited the flak against its expansion. Yeah, it's entirely plausible that Greenpeace and FOE are paid agents. What gutter sell-outs!
Posted by Zanyrams, on January 2, 2009 at 10:03
Kudos to the writer for sticking a fork in the rear of FOE and Greenpeace and the other liars and smear artists!
Posted by guantanamoreject, on January 2, 2009 at 9:42
Leave your comments
Please login to leave your comments.
FOE, Greenpeace and their Dubious Anti-Palm Oil Position 
