SCORES of protesters throughout the nation have been citing the devastating drought as evidence of why Governments must take greater and immediate action on 'catastrophic' climate change.
Green politicians and their backers regularly point to scientific 'truth' as justification for their boisterous demands to see political and social responsibility taken, on the planet's future.
Anyone who disagrees with these views is immediately ridiculed and labelled a 'climate-denier' with the social standing and intellect of a troglodyte.
But what suddenly happened to those strict standards and values when those same Greens raised the disallowance motion that passed the South Australian parliament recently, to prevent genetically modified (GM) canola being grown in that State?
Unfortunately, producers were merely collateral damage in an act of rank hypocrisy, where scientific truth was disregarded.
This political catastrophe is counterintuitive to the credible body of scientific proof on plant biotechnology - including evidence of environmental benefits - which actually outweighs the global scientific consensus on climate change.
It also contradicts proven agronomic, economic and environmental advances from growing different GM varieties successfully throughout the globe and in other parts of Australia, for about 25-years.
In a recent article on the Genetic Literacy Project, science writer Cameron J. English said trillions of meals have been consumed since biotechnology derived foods such as corn, soybeans, alfalfa, potatoes, squash and papaya first started being produced, in the United States.
"How many deaths or illnesses have been linked to genetically modified crops? Not one. Not so much as a sniffle," he said.
"That's not a surprise to scientists, as almost every food-related expert and every major oversight or regulatory body in the world has concluded that biotech crops are as safe for human and animal consumption as food grown conventionally or organically."
Other arguments used to justify the political stance in South Australia, such as a so-called premium for growing non-GM canola, have been discredited through independent economic analysis, but yet somehow evidence and facts are all-too often ignored on this issue.
This convenient ignorance is why South Australian farmers have been denied access to this safe technology, while watching on as producers in other States have grown GM canola successfully, such as their neighbours in Victoria for the past 12-years.
This has occurred without even the slightest hint of any of the doomsday forecasts that were touted by politicians and activists in the lead-up to the end of the GM moratorium coming true.
Unfortunately, this irresponsible behaviour dents confidence in the local market, scaring-off investment - not just in South Australia - into plant biotechnology research and development of new crops that actually enhance farmers' long-term ability to manage climate adaptation.
For non-farming Australians, who've witnessed the debate raging over the GM decision in South Australia and may have been wondering what all the fuss was about, the explanation is quite simple.
It's no different to a single Australian jurisdiction banning laptops and other modern communication technologies that help deliver improved improve educational outcomes, while teachers and children in other schools throughout the country can access such tools, to deliver genuine benefits.
GM canola isn't going to immediately solve every problem our farmers are experiencing right now due to this savage drought and other challenges.
But it's an invaluable tool with great potential to help build sustainability and grow crops that produce better results in a world we're continually told, especially by those who preach science when demanding radical climate action, carries increased production volatility.
A story of environmental progress these scientific vandals won't share with the public - like a skeleton in the closet - is the one about GM cotton that was first planted in Australia in 1996.
Before its introduction, growers spent about $50 million annually on insecticides - but in the 20-years of using GM varieties, improved pest control has led to a 92 per cent reduction in insecticide use.
In 2016, GM cotton accounted for 98 per cent of total cotton plantings, in Australia.
This proves exactly what can happen when growers are given the choice to move beyond the scare tactics of vocal minorities and experience the real and practical scientific, environmental and economic benefits, on-farm.
