Natasha Vita-More wrote:
> The more due diligence we do, both on the pro-tech groups and the anti-tech
> groups, the better. Thanks.
It occurred to me there is a minority we havent heard from: the pro-GM
greens. This is not at all a contradiction in terms, for the line of reasoning
is this:
1) Greens are not necessarily anti-humans, just pro-wilderness.
2) Farms displace wild animals.
3) If farms could be made to produce more food using less
real estate and less water, then all the better for wilderness.
4) GM could result in crops that produce more food using
less real estate, pesticides, fertilizer, water, etc.
5) Therefore, GM is green.
Well, for crying out loud, tech heads are not necessarily anti-animal:
I *like* animals! They are so tasty. {8^D Ive nothing against trees
and birds either, in fact I like them too. If the greens took on a
pro-GM stance, everybody would win. spike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:35:06 MDT