Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagor
Do you honestly expect to be taken seriously with a stunt like that? Is it that you're just forgetful re. what evidence was presented towards both sides of the debate or is it that you're just trying to be downright dishonest in recapping the presented evidence. Present a recap of both sides of the debate and let the poster make an informed decision of his own.
Scientific literature claiming it does create superweeds .... ignored. A Calpuck poster claiming it doesn't .... presented.
TBQH, the coles notes is this. Scientific publications are stating that GMOs have indirectly led to the rise in superweeds. Bloggers, tweeters and forum posters with pers comms with farmers say it hasn't. Scientific literature has been requested to support their position that it doesn't.
|
edit: To give this some background, I came into this thread as someone who was in a general and mostly uninformed sense, against the use of GMO crops.
I gave him the coles notes as I had digested them. I didn't feel the need to regurgitate the entire argument in the thread, but just my synthesis of that argument as it related to the point that he made.
Here is my issue with the bolded section:
If GMO crops lead to Roundup resistant weeds, which are also caused by regular non-GMO roundup use, then there is not a strong enough relationship to determine that GMO crops are causing the RoundUp resistant weeds.
The link is hardly causal.