I think it's a case of being pragmatic and applying some common sense to the debate about organic gardening (which is practically a tautologous expression in any event).
Why shouldn't we use technology to control pests, for example, when it is safe to do so? Yes, there are many 'natural' things that can harm us - arsenic, tobacco.... - and we shouldn't pretend that organics is pure, clean and its followers the only possessors of the truth and the light. But neither should be turn away from organic principles because of a reaction against what, for many, is seen to be a fad, a trend of little more substance behind it than a penchant for flared trousers.
Being a complete novice, I've looked around second-hand bookshops for anything that can help me learn about what to do with my allotment. I've come across a few old and not-so-old books that recommend the application of chemical fertilisers without comment as being the most natural thing on Earth. One author in particular is still on the tele and you'd be forgiven for thinking that this 'inorganic' phase of his career had never happened.
I think we're all learning and always discovering more about what works and doesn't harm our world, even the 'experts'. A distaste for the all too common 'lifestyle over substance gurus' shouldn't alter the fact that, in my view at least, there's a lot to be said for organic gardening.
Jim