4 ms·
> It is because the industry has done a great job as labeling the critics as anti-science. It's not "the industry" doing the labeling, scientific consensus isn
by frostmatthew 12y ago
> It is because the industry has done a great job as labeling the critics as anti-science.
It's not "the industry" doing the labeling, scientific consensus isn't so easily bought - if it were oil companies (who have far more money than Monsanto et al) would have made sure the science on climate change was on their side.
In another comment[1] I provided several links you may find useful in making a more informed opinion.
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9451873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9451873
- 13years 12y agoI think you highly underestimate the influence of the this industry and the pressure it can exert. "U.S. Government Planned To “Retaliate & Cause Pain” On Countries Refusing GMOs" http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/07/30/wikileaks-cables-reveal-u-s-government-planned-to-retaliate-cause-pain-on-countries-refusing-gmos/ http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/07/30/wikileaks-cab...
- federico3 12y ago> It's not "the industry" doing the labeling, scientific consensus isn't so easily bought - if it were oil companies (who have far more money than Monsanto et al) would have made sure the science on climate change was on their side. You are confusing the complexity and difficulty of bending the truth around climate change VS GM.