Is Organic Food "Better"?

The never-ending debate over organic versus conventional food continues. Even Penn & Teller have gotten into the act, seeking to debunk what they see as the myths surrounding organic food. James McWilliams has a different take, part of which I agree with. His important corrective is to point out that arguments over whether organic food is more nutritious or better tasting in some scientifically identifiable way is besides the point. I agree with him on that. And I would add that the term "organic" is at the center of a huge fight now, because there is so much money involved and it is one area that is still seeing remarkable growth. What this means is that "organic" is a misleading term some times that masks a very diverse community. Cascadian Farm, for instance, is a pretty large operation these days. And its products are shipped all over the country, creating almost as large a carbon footprint as conventional products. The confusion, then, is often between "organic" and "local." I haven't run the experiment, but I am willing to bet a locally grown tomato that is conventionally raised will taste as good, if not better, than an organic tomato from California (which is 3000 miles away from where I live). I know that they both beat a conventionally grown, non-local baseball, er, tomato that you get in the super market. In terms of taste, there is probably not much difference between organic and conventional bananas, but the conventional banana probably does more harm to the soil because of pesticides. McWilliams goes on to point out the "organic" movements origins are spiritual. That may be, but I guess I am not that concerned with the spiritual origins -- most movements grow beyond their roots, otherwise they cannot survive.