...

It’s got non GMO purists in a tizzy, but presents an interesting philosophical question- what is more ethical? Breeding a 15/16ths hybrid? Or something much closer to the original DNA such as this? I can’t decide.

I think the dramatic loss of species here in the US means we should let them both into the wild. We need trees, period. I can’t think of an unintended biological repercussion to the wheat-spliced chestnut. But then again I haven’t watched Jurassic Park in a while, so my hubris is running a little high right now.

American Chestnut Foundation is cool. Next time you’re buying a $25 carabiner maybe send them a little dough too.

 
My opposition to GMO’s is very specific, for example to create “Roundup Ready” herbicide resistant crops. The other negative are the patents on the various GMO crops which means farmers cannot lharvest their own seed stock. When pollen from GMO crops drifts into non-GMO fields the genetics are contaminated and that farmer can’t legally harvest their own seed stock either.

When GMO’s aren’t used to enable/require massive herbicide use or control the international seed market I’m fine with it.

Stewart Brand glosses over the massive loss of mature and old-growth forest worldwide. It’s not a simple equation of “forested land vs no forest”.
-AJ
Stewart Brand, founder of 'The Whole Earty' catalog on GMO's.

t’s
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom