You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #52: No they weren't [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
PaulaFarrell Donating Member (840 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-16-09 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #49
52. No they weren't
They've both been around far longer than biotech. As for the argument, "people have been modifying plants for generations", well that's not what's meant by a GMO and and trying to imply it is is dishonest. Not sure that's what you're implying, but no one who is anti-GM is against creating better strains of plants, they are against GMO technology. You don't need GM to make something seedless - just selectively breed until fewer and fewer seeds are produced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC