Frankenstein and genetic modification essay

When Will We Be Transhuman? We can at least pretend to know where it is we want humanity to go.

I want to start with some apologies. For the record, here and upfront, I apologise for having spent several years ripping up GM crops. I am also sorry that I helped to start the anti-GM movement back in the mid s, and that I thereby assisted in demonising an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment.

As an environmentalist, and someone who believes that everyone in this world has a right to a healthy and nutritious diet of their choosing, I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path. I now regret it completely. Well, the answer is fairly simple: I discovered science, and in the process I hope I became a better environmentalist.

Here was a big American corporation with a nasty track record, putting something new and experimental into our food without telling us. Mixing genes between species seemed to be about as unnatural as you can get — here was humankind acquiring too much technological power; something was bound to go horribly wrong.

These genes would spread like some kind of living pollution. It was the stuff of nightmares. This was the most successful campaign I have ever been involved with.

Key SF News & SF Awards

This was also explicitly an anti-science movement. We employed a lot of imagery about scientists in their labs cackling demonically as they tinkered with the very building blocks of life. Hence the Frankenstein food tag — this absolutely was about deep-seated fears of scientific powers being used secretly for unnatural ends.

For me this anti-science environmentalism became increasingly inconsistent with my pro-science environmentalism with regard to climate change. I published my first book on global warming inand I was determined to make it scientifically credible rather than just a collection of anecdotes.

So I had to back up the story of my trip to Alaska with satellite data on sea ice, and I had to justify my pictures of disappearing glaciers in the Andes with long-term records of mass balance of mountain glaciers. That meant I had to learn how to read scientific papers, understand basic statistics and become literate in very different fields from oceanography to paleoclimate, none of which my degree in politics and modern history helped me with a great deal.

So I lectured them about the value of peer-review, about the importance of scientific consensus and how the only facts that mattered were the ones published in the most distinguished scholarly journals.

My second climate book, Six Degrees, was so sciency that it even won the Royal Society science books prize, and climate scientists I had become friendly with would joke that I knew more about the subject than them.

And yet, incredibly, at this time in I was still penning screeds in the Guardian attacking the science of GM — even though I had done no academic research on the topic, and had a pretty limited personal understanding. Obviously this contradiction was untenable.

What really threw me were some of the comments underneath my final anti-GM Guardian article.

Frankenstein and genetic modification essay

In particular one critic said to me: Are you also opposed to the wheel because because it is marketed by the big auto companies? So I did some reading. And I discovered that one by one my cherished beliefs about GM turned out to be little more than green urban myths.

It turned out that pest-resistant cotton and maize needed less insecticide.

As Many Exceptions As Rules: Frankenstein Meets Genetic Modification

It turned out that billions of dollars of benefits were accruing to farmers needing fewer inputs. It turned out that hybrids did that long ago, and that Terminator never happened. Actually what happened was that Bt cotton was pirated into India and roundup ready soya into Brazil because farmers were so eager to use them.

It turned out that it was safer and more precise than conventional breeding using mutagenesis for example; GM just moves a couple of genes, whereas conventional breeding mucks about with the entire genome in a trial and error way.TOAST.

Books by Charles Stross. Singularity Sky. The Atrocity Archive. Iron Sunrise. The Family Trade. The Hidden Family. Accelerando.

Frankenstein and genetic modification essay

TOAST. Charles Stross. COSMOS BOOKS. Transcript of Genetic Engineering and Frankenstein. Genetic Engineering Frankenstein something that a person does genetically to create something new a monster was created the way the creator wanted it to be (Dr. Frankenstein) made up of different human body parts or genes.

Genetic Modification Essay. Genetic Modification Over 20 years ago it was discovered that genes, and parts of genes, could be extracted from DNA using protein "scissors" then copied, or cloned.

Economic Impact of Genetic Engineering Essay. Genetic engineering (GE) is a recently developed technology that allows the alteration of the genetic. Frankenstein: How A Monster Became an Icon: The Science and Enduring Allure of Mary Shelley's Creation - Kindle edition by Sidney Perkowitz, Eddy von Mueller.

Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and highlighting while reading Frankenstein: How A Monster Became an Icon: The Science and Enduring Allure of Mary.

A selection of recent stories about the San Francisco State University community that have appeared in the media. Note: These summaries link directly to pages published by the media outlets cited.

The Effects of Genetic Engineering on Agriculture - Genetic engineering is a way in which specific genes for an animal or plant can be extracted, and reproduced to form a new animal or plant.

SF State in the News | SF State News