Altered Genes, Twisted Truth: How the Venture to Genetically Engineer Our Food Has Subverted Science

[longship]

130. It is not up to me to prove genetic modification safe.

It is up to the contrarians to demonstrate the opposite, just like the climate science deniers. Put up, or shut up.

When a substantial body of science that crosses disciplines comes to a concensus about nature, it is not up to those people who have worked diligently to demonstrate their work to do so again to a wholly ignorant ideological cabal who disagree solely on the basis of the research instead of the evidence and results. There are numerous examples of such things. Creationism, and its evil spawn intelligent design. Lysenkoism which impeded Soviet medicine for decades to the point that when Chernobyl hit, they had insufficient doctors to solve the crisis.

Science is not a matter of opinion. The final arbitrator is nature, not anybody's opinion. But science does have a methodology, and it works well. The extent to which it does not agree with nature is the extent to which either the theory or methods should be adjusted, the former being preferred over the latter.

That is how science works, not by some ad hoc screechings by people who have no knowledge or no arguments.

When there are peer reviewed papers in the scientific literature which back up anti-GMO claims, I will consider them. However, warning! The basic science is against that hypothesis, which is not very promising as these things go. And therefore, there is no support for the anti-GMO claims.