“The history of American agriculture suggests that you can have transformation without a master plan, without knowing all the answers up front.” (Atul Gawande) Agriculture is something that has existed for centuries. It is what kept us alive, what had fed and grown the nations of the world. We would not have thrived and flourished without revolutionizing agriculture the way we did the rest of the world; This much is true. However, now that we’ve learned to live rather than survive, and have done so for centuries, we are now doing more harm than good as a whole. No matter which side you may take, there is no denying there is a direct correlation between the rapidly developing issues with the world, both natural and human-kind and…show more content… There are those strongly for the business, those strongly against, and those stuck in between. One man, Blake Hurst (Author of ‘the Omnivore’s Delusion: Against the Agri-intellectuals) is obviously for it, as a farmer himself. He states, “I’m so tired of people who wouldn’t visit a doctor who used a stethoscope instead of an MRI demanding that farmers like me use 1930’s technology to raise food. Farming has always been messy and painful, and bloody and dirty. It still is.” Clearly, he is angered with those who argue against him, but yet he goes on to ‘cite’ all the reasons why they are wrong, without using any sort of source beyond his own word of mouth. To the outside viewer, it could appear to be a credible one, as he has been farming for 30 years (“But now we have to listen to self-appointed experts on airplanes frightening their seatmates about the profession I have practiced for more than 30 years” Direct quote from said article ) and can be a trusted source, correct? But if you take it apart, and analyze it more closely, you would come to understand one man’s personal experiences cannot speak for the whole industry. There was a few cited quotes and claims, but only for the point of showing the argument against his. The so-called, ‘wrong’ side. Still, not once does he take an outside opinion for his own argument. From a technical point of view, the paper was one not to be used as a thesis base, but rather
