4 ms·
None of those are particularly controversial from a scientific perspective, only a political one. Meanwhile the long-term future and impact of GMO's and the com
by M_Grey 10y ago
None of those are particularly controversial from a scientific perspective, only a political one. Meanwhile the long-term future and impact of GMO's and the companies who control them are genuinely uncertain, not merely political charged.
- sampo 10y agoActually, there is a slightly higher consensus (89% of scientists) in GMO safety than there is for human-influenced climate change (88% of scientists). http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_8915_b_6572130.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-entine/post_8915_b_6572130...
- M_Grey 10y ago>Meanwhile the long-term future and impact of GMO's and the companies who control them are genuinely uncertain... That article in no way addresses my point, and I'm not in the camp who believes that GMO's are currently unsafe. If you've been reading the comment chain, you'd be aware that the discussion is about the largely unregulated nature of the beast, not to mention economic implications. As for a consensus on AGW, IIRC wasn't that more like 97%? I mean, unless you pad out the numbers by looking at people outside of the relevant fields of course.