teh luddites, fl33!

I couldn't help but laugh when I read this article

I accept people have concerns about GM food that bears rational discussion. Really I do. Ok, I think they are luddites, particularly if we arent talking genes taken across species or from animals to plants. I firmly believe the source of the genes and the actual modification should be included on labelling to allow informed judgement and mitigate risks of litigation.

This is all besides the point. In the article, the arguement is to say that "GM crops need more water and do not perform well in dry conditions". This is at best specious as arguements go. The whole bloody POINT of Genetic Modification is to change how a plant performs.

In my occasionally less than humble opinion, they are actually making an arguement for MORE GM. Particularly if previous attempts to make low water requirements or hardier plants have failed, clearly more research is required.

What I understand even less is that it is farmers complaining. Fucking hell, it was farmers that started genetic modification of crops and livestock several thousand years ago, I dont understand why they have suddenly decided they dont think it is a good thing??

Such a funny world, so many folks with knee jerk opposition to advancement that involves self conflicting or spurious arguements. Hell, even the Amish are more rational at judging technology and its impact; if fact, we could all learn a thing or two about rationally considering the impact of a technology from them.

Anyway...
err!
jak