Without addressing the validity or invalidity of your assessment of the merits of his position (or the position itself), his views are insubstantial (or at leas

Without addressing the validity or invalidity of your assessment of the merits of his position (or the position itself), his views are insubstantial (or at least of limited substance) for some other reasons too. For instance, while he appeals to science and reason here, not all the organic-enviro-antiGMO complex holds its positions for reasons of science. There's a substantial number of people for whom it is part of superstitious and para-religious reasoning behind peoples' objections. (In other news, Whole Foods sells homeopathic remedies.) Even beyond the superstitious, there are a lot of anti-GMO advocates whose primary form of investment is emotional, not intellectual. (Actually, you could probably say that about most political positions...) It's easy enough to treat the guy as a heretic in that sort of environment.