Selfsufficientish.com

Hmmm ...

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense ... wrong.html

Cat amongst the pigeons time?

Mike

Something the ''meeja'' don't seem to understand is the notion that an idea maybe more than the sum of the ' celebrity' that support it .If they can't build it round an individual,then it's worthless to them.(off topic,if the guy thinks this is a bigger volte face than Lovelocke's 'convertion to Nuclear,then he's clearly not read a lot).
Why do the pro GM mob bother with all this crap? It's going to be everywhere ,anyway,and soon.
They want it...We'll get it.

This is a really big debate which has good and bad points on each side.
On one hand GMO crops can be developed to be resistant to diseases, pests, molds and fungus's, droughts and floods, making it possible to have high yielding crops anywhere in the world which will be able to feed more people, people in places like Africa where they have problems with over population and famine. We, or the scientists, can produce better, more productive and resistant crops than nature can, and we can eliminate the need for pesticides and other agricultural chemicals which can damage us and the environment.
On the other hand there is the implications on what might happen if these GMO varieties were released into the environment. Whose to tell what effects it would have on the local and global ecosystems. But I don't believe there is any evidence to suggest that eating GMO foods has any negative effect out our health.
There is a cost issue as well to think about. It costs a whole lot more to produce GMO crops than normal crops so who really can afford it? Probably not the people who most need it.

I think a lot more research needs to take place and maybe the GMO debate will never be fully resolved. The potential implications on the ecosystems from GMO crops is a big big issue, the main one from where i stand. They certainly need to do more research into that. Is messing with nature really such a good thing? I suppose it comes under the same issues as cloning and designer babies, it still has a big question mark next to it.

Or, we could forget GMOs and just not throw away quite so much: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20968076 - "Half of all food 'thrown away' claims report"

The Riff-Raff Element wrote:Or, we could forget GMOs and just not throw away quite so much: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20968076 - "Half of all food 'thrown away' claims report"

We don't waste any food. Leftovers go to the dog.

I don't understand why I'm supposed to care about the views of Mark Lynas in particular...

I still maintain that thinking of it it terms of pro- or anti-GMO is silly. Nobody is pro- or anti-fire, the question is about what you do with it.