|
|
|
| Authored by: albert on Friday, September 21 2012 @ 02:11 PM EDT |
Why do we need to 'adapt' our environment to us? Shouldn't we adapt ourselves
to the environment? That seemed to be the case throughout all of our
evolution.
It is because 'we' have messed up, and continue to mess up, the environment,
that we need to 'adapt' . We're in a period of devolution right now, because we
are screwing up natural processes. Whether or not that is a good reason for GM
foods is a point of discussion.
Cynicism, yes!
Chemistry, well, maybe simple logic.
Religion, no.
Apologies if your comment was directed to someone else {:-)>
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: tiger99 on Saturday, September 22 2012 @ 12:46 PM EDT |
| .... that when we get it wrong (as is inevitable in some cases, perhaps many),
the effects are so dire that the risk is completely unacceptable. Testing in a
closed environment would be necessary for many years, more likely generations,
before product safety could be proved. The horrendous effects of Chernobyl and
Fukishima were mostly limited to the local area, which is not necessarily so
when some problematic plant life leaves the laboratory. Once it is out, all hope
of control is lost. It is not even GM, just a naturally occurring pest, but
large parts of the UK are at risk from Japanese knotweed, and
other parts of the world are also having problems from "foreign" species. There
is very grave danger of worse from GM species. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
