Re: GloFish Zebra Danio Question

"Graham Ramsay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>We have been manipulating the genes of animals and plants for thousands
>of years using various techniques. It strikes me as odd that people should
>object to just one of them.

Perhaps you're simply unable to appreciate the difference between
manipulating existing traits within a species vs. inserting traits
from a completely unrelated species. 

>We've already got a poster on this thread making the ridiculous 
>connection with jellyfish and their stinging cells. It's basic 
>misunderstanding's like that, that I feel are obscuring the 
>arguments.

That poster would be me, thanks. From your reaction it's obvious that
you misinterpreted the point, perhaps because you're so busy looking
for positions to attack that you fail to take the time to comprehend
them. To borrow from you, basic misinterpretations like that are
obscuring the arguments. 

I wasn't making any connection between the stinging cells and GM, but
rather just answering "nospams" question as to whether the jellyfish
were toxic, and anticipating the next argument his question seemed to
be leading to. I certainly know enough about the subject to understand
that the gene for glowing isn't the same one that governs stinging
cells.

>I have no fervour for GM technology, as it happens I have yet to be
>convinced of its usefulness. But I do object to the tidal wave of 
>ignorance and misplaced fear that the anti-GM lobby has unleashed.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think you'll find the
anti-GM lobby thinks the fear is well placed, precisely because of
human ignorance in meddling with things that have such profound
potential. 

--
www.ericschreiber.com