"Bob Hobden" wrote in message
...

"Oz" wrote in message after me after Oz .........(snip)

[snip]

Mutations (natural) do that all the time.
yawn

True, they do mutate, and that is natural and part of evolution, they
don't
insert themselves from one species (or even genera) to another .

Ever heard of natural interspecific hybrids?



BUT my point is that scientists cannot predict these "mutations" caused
when
they start inserting foreign genes into something, they happen
unexpectedly
and cause unexpected results in the Lab .

Mother Nature cannot predict these "mutations" caused .......(sic)
The scientists *can* predict the primary result of a gene modification. Do
you think they waste their time randomly mucking about in the hopes that
something useful might turn up?

: I feel that is proof that the
science is not good enough yet to be allowed out of the Lab and into our
world.

Your feelings do not constitute a scientific argument.

The scientists don't know whats going on!

On the contrary. The scientists involved know one hell of a lot about what
is going on. That is why they can make controlled genetic changes whereas
Mother Nature just does it by sucking and seeing.



[snip]

Species have been being lost for 1000,000,000's of years.
Big deal. Best avoided, but it's actually quite hard to take a species
to extinction, particularly insects, unless you remove their ecosystem.
The field is already a species-deficient zone, being essentially a
monoculture of necessity (even organic fields).

From those comments I understand you don't mind if there is significant
change brought about by GM. Here we differ fundamentally.

May I take it that you eat no domesticated animal meat at all, and that you
restrict your vegetable intake to natural species of wild wheat and crab
apples?





more use of chemicals in farming,

Unlikely. Most/all gmo's use fewer chemicals because if they didn't
there would be no point using them at all. The reduction of insecticide
use in BT cotton has by all accounts been huge for example.

Not what I've heard. Herbicide resistant crops so they can be sprayed with
more herbicides.

I think you have missed a very important point. The resistance involved is
a very specific resistance to glyphosate and glyphosate only. If one
sprayed with any herbicide other than glyphosate, one will have no crop.
And if one sprayed with more glyphosate than necessary, one is a fool who
ought not to attempt farming.

[snip]

I think you would have made a more valid point if you had not mixed up the
science involved in genetic modification, with the interests of the
Agrochemical companies involved. But such is the nature of capitalism.....

Franz