> What ever could go wrong playing with nature? :-) No offense (seriously), but this argument is the biggest load of bullshit. Do you think there are any majo

> What ever could go wrong playing with nature? :-) No offense (seriously), but this argument is the biggest load of bullshit. Do you think there are any major food sources that just developed, as is, naturally? Pretty much every vegetable, fruit, grain, or pulse - has been selectively developed by humans, many over the course of thousands of years. The bananas we eat can't even reproduce without our direct intervention. Animals, too, both livestock and pets - that dachshund wasn't running wild in the forest before we tamed it. We've been playing with nature as long as we've been able to do so. Genetic engineering is just a better set of tools for it. Somehow, though, people have convinced themselves that the selective breeding process is safer than direct genetic manipulation. Because, of course, breeding crops based on taste or visual appeal makes for safer and better development of crops - why pick the specific traits you want when you can just fumble about for generations without a clear idea of what you're gonna get? Should we be careful? Sure, in this as in all things we do; but the fact that the technology is new isn't the reason why.