4 ms·
>It seems to be well understood by scientists, and much of science is carried out in the open neglected doesn't mean a lack of knowlege. >to give little atten
by Vt71fcAqt7 4y ago
>It seems to be well understood by scientists, and much of science is carried out in the open
neglected doesn't mean a lack of knowlege.
>to give little attention or respect to[0].
In fact it usually implies a presence of knowledge that is... neglected. So in this case it would be anyone who ignores this danger. For illustration a simplified example could be something like a growth gene that spreads to weeds.
>so it begs the question
Do you mean to say "so it raises the question?"
[0]https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neglect https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/neglect
- trap_goes_hot 4y agoGetting back to the conversation, do you have any examples of real-world neglect that we can discuss?
- Vt71fcAqt7 4y agoNo. I just wanted to clarify OP's statement. They weren't claiming that scientists don't know about horizontal gene transfer or that anyone is necessarily neglecting it currently, only that it is a "potential danger," which is true and discussed as a legitmate concern in the literature.
- trap_goes_hot 4y agoI read the comment differently, I guess we'll never know unless OP responds.