> >People start throwing link after link of facts > You get upset when people present you with links to facts to respond to your proposed ideas? Facts do not

> >People start throwing link after link of facts > You get upset when people present you with links to facts to respond to your proposed ideas? Facts do not make an argument. Most scientists agree that GMOs are safe for human consumption as currently regulated in the US, but if you try to say that, many people will respond with a bunch of facts: * Some GMOs allow us to use more pesticides. * Monsanto patents seeds. * Government regulations are often skewed by corporate interests. * Genetic engineering can have dangerous side-effects. These are all facts. They're all true. They all should be considered when evaluating the safety of genetically modified foods. But they're not used in conjunction with the rest of the facts to come up with a measured, thoughtful position. They're used to shut down the discussion and "win". That's a problem. It's not just a problem for people who "have trouble defending the ideas in the face of factual sources". They're a problem for anyone interested in finding a truth or a reasonable position that extends beyond a collection of cherry-picked facts.