I don’t get why you see a greater risk in the old method of cross breeding — where thousands of genes are mixed randomly, larger crops are needed for testing, and then marginal gains are picked out — compared to gene splicing , where a handful of genes are mixed far less randomly, and the gains are picked out faster, with smaller crop size, with risk and gains more quickly assessed?
And I don’t get why you talk only about the risk of meddling with “The Ecosystem” (which is hyperbolic to say the least — A crop is not “The Ecosystem”/Uncle) , but don’t talk about the possible gains of smaller, less random experiments with more surgical tools.
There are always risks, but one of them is not “messing with nature” and having to deal with old-school crop failure (which would be far worse in a 7.5 billion human world)
Feel free to answer with a fire and brimstone response.
