And just one more thing- do you think you could have a “robust discussion” with an influential person- a role model and teacher and published author- who base their information about environmental damage on the hearsay of Trolls (10-meter long ones) ?

Of course ‘scientific credibility’ is the basis of our Governments, public bodies and most NGOs approach to the issues such as sustainability and of course I and most people concur that approach. I am not one who supports superstition. I do however come to the issues as many others do from both a humanistic and religious perspective. For me both perspectives are not in conflict. There are quite a few within the Christian churches who because of their faith are working hard on sustainability initiatives and at the same time adopt a scientific approach. I dont think in these cases it is a question of ‘victory’ of science over religion but rather religion giving impetus and a sense of dedication to their tasks.

The posts and comments around climate change / peak oil and the global / local responses (such as the courses you have just posted Graham ) are I think, more relevant and are more tangible .

It doesnt make sense, Alanna- but then, from what you say, it appears that making sense is not your intention. You say: “The greatest evils of this world are big business (backed up by science), plus the monetary system, right? So whose sides are you guys on? “

Well, that is a big statement- I feel it might be worth adding in “religion” in this group- and you by your own words are promoting religion. The key difference is this:faith-based religions are not open to crticism or debate; they rely on people being too cowed to question them. Science, on the other hand, relies on facing challenges from its critics- the validity of a scientific view depends upon its ability to withstand attacks from other viewpoints. Any open and honest person would welcome critical debate of their subject, no matter what it was. The rest of your comment consists of ad hominem remarks aimed at discrediting me or other rationalist commentators personally without any reference to what is actually being said. All my own remarks throughout this whole debate have been internally consistent and rational arguments aimed at specific points that you have written. I have not made any personal comments about you (or your gardening abilities, for example) and even the odd bit of sarcasm and fun-poking have been aimed at specific comments you have made. I have not cast any negative assertions about you as a person. Your own comments come much closer to “hate mail” and libel than anything I have written. You have attempted to dismiss myself and other commentators on this blog as being “ignorant” and not knowing what we are taking about and yet have not engaged in any way with what is actually being said, which has mainly been a discussion of evidence and critical thinking and the dangers for permaculture and sustainability of the spread of faith-based views which are not open to critisism.

What right do you have to make comments here about my course or the perceived grievances of my students? you do them a disservice as well: they are all quite capable of expressing their own opinions and indeed that is of course the whole point of teaching critical thinking- as opposed to your own stance which seems to consist of nothing more than an desperate attempt to squash any debate at all costs.

Are you inciting my students to send me hate mail? When I first approached this subject on the course and stated that there is no such things as fairies, I was told by one student (an excellent student and an otherwise very nice person) that I “should be lynched for saying that”. I have never, ever heard a rationalist express any such sentiment towards believers, even in jest (which this was not). Unfortunately, as you are also showing, beneath the “caring for the earth and the people” facade of these religious beliefs often hides a noxious violence. It is quite redundant of you to encourage them to post their comments here- the whole debate is part of their critical thinking reading list. I have always pointed them here and some have posted their comments- most of which have been in support of the rational stance, so how do you explain that Alanna? One comment from a student last year read: “Thanks for getting people to base their view-points in reality instead of mumbo-jumbo”. I assure you, many people -including staff at Permaculture Magazine- have thanked me personally for having the courage to raise these issues and open a debate which is long overdue. You owe us all an apology. If really think that “that no-one gives a rat’s arse about scientific credibility”, why get so upset about my blog? And why continue to try to claim scientific respectability for your religion? The reason New-Agers are so anti-science is because they dont understand it and because they only speak to each other. My wish is to try to point people to other views and teach them how to weigh up the evidence and think for themselves. Wake up and come out of your bubble and realise just how goofy these beliefs seem to many other people, both within and without the environmental movement. Several people I spoke with about this debate last week had trouble believing me. They though I was joking. They think you must be Off Your Troll. (With thanks to Rick for the headline!)

Some weeks back I asked the ‘moderator’ of this blog to remove references to me, as they were full of hatred and slander (such as stating that I was a fraudulent quack) and this has not been done.

I have been polite in my communications so far but only received incredible rudeness in response. So now the time has come for me to say how I feel about my experience of this blog site.

1. I have been shocked by the way people are encouraged by GS to trot out their bigotry and attack people with a self styled righteousness of religious scale fervour. And I personally have never been so insulted in my life! It makes me feel really angry. Fortunately I know how to channel my anger into positive pursuits.

2. Rational ratbags

The greatest evils of this world are big business (backed up by science), plus the monetary system, right? So whose sides are you guys on? It is obvious from my interactions with a great many people, especially the people of the land, the farmers and permaculture practitioners, that no-one gives a rat’s arse about scientific credibility, in fact they are understandably sceptical about science and scientists. So there is absolutely no point in wanking off about it.

Some of my colleagues are scientists, who write for my magazine and are in my books. They are also dowsers. We just get on with doing the best we can to help the planet.

In comparison, the hatred peddlars of Z5 just come across as sick, sad and ineffectual.

1. If you are going to peddle poison, poison will come back to you.

   The Z5 blogs have been inciting others to express and develop hatred of subjects which they know nothing about. Yet they want to make it their business to express opinions on these subjects. Has anyone who has been commenting read my books? Do any of you know anything about me? You’ve done plenty of guessing… People have been allowed, encouraged, on these sick pages to go right on and try to trash my good name. Without any moderation from the ‘moderator’. In fact, he is the worst !

A suggestion that he apologise to me has not been taken up. (Apart from “apologises in advance” for an unspecified purpose.

Fortunately I maintain an excellent reputation, so public insults would have to be more damaging to the perpetrator than to me.

Meanwhile the perpetrator has a lousy reputation amongst ex-students. I have been told by several ex-students of their high levels of dissatisfaction, including relentless, totally unwarranted attacks on their personal views.

This is not permaculture people care, nor is it sustainable. It is an abuse of power of the teacher/student relationship. I shall be encouraging any more ex-students I meet to vent their hurt feelings on the Z5 blog pages.

1. Permaculture is about inspiring people to go for positive solutions. Zone 5 is mostly negative.

Fortunately an antidote is on it’s way. ‘Permaculture Ireland’ will be promoting positive action with a free magazine and PDC / permaculture design certificate courses on offer next year. We will be encouraging fun and laughter as part of the learning experience. So if any prospective students might be reading this they will now know that there is fresh new hope for sustainability here, with wholesome, holistic permaculture on its way, at a website near you.

1. So stick this on your blog and wave it around for all to see!

http://markwallace32.blogspot.com/2008/08/woo-woo-wound-two.html