Those who don't support GMO are silly and really have no idea how much it has helped feed the world. I know they have seen sci fi movies with mutated things eating people and the planet but in fact there isn't anything less digestible in a genetically modified plant IMO. So I would support GMO even if it caused extra CO2.
I have no problems with GMOs. Genetically modified organisms can be more resistant to droughts, frost, disease and pests and could be more nutricious than non-modified organisms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice
And the idea that they could harm us is dumb. Genetically modified food is broken down in the digestive system to the same components that are found in all foods.
But, they will not solve global warming. Like all plants, they are just part of the biological carbon cycle. If they grow bigger or faster, we will just have more food.
I support GMO but not to stop global warming.
It sounds good, but like most ideas, in practice it could backfire severely on us. Also, its not as simple as that. More CO2 that plants use means more water consumed. What happens when they die? Are these plants going to be invasive?
GMOs are generally good. If a crazy scientist did whatever he wanted with making GMOs, there is potential for bad side effects.
A good idea to reduce carbon dioxide levels in the air would be to have bioluminescent trees. EVERYONE would want one, leading to many trees being planted.
I still have... some concerns about some of the GMOs out there, though more about *how* they're used than the bare fact that they exist (I have some similar, or at least overlapping, concerns about our near-exclusive use of monoculture hybrid seeds, instead of a more robust system using multiple varieties of seeds that can, if necessary, be saved for the next harvest.
Bu I do not conceptually object to GMOs (ask me about golden rice, I think it's a pretty cool idea), and with appropriate caution (to make sure there weren't unwanted secondary effects), I wouldn't have an inherent problem with using genetically modified plants as part of a carbon capture program.
GMO's - no thanks, they're a pollutant to the environment and once the genie is out of the bottle it can never go back in. What's the point in risking it, we already have perfectly good natural food, which if you look into it, tends to out perform frankenfoods.
Do you mean something like the harvestable chaff is genetically modified for a high wax or oil content that is easily processed into various hydrocarbons?
Why not gasberry?
Yes
I have grave doubts about GMO's because there is very little independent review on the safety of these products, much more independent testing and evaluation needs to be done.
I may be cynical but somehow a product from Monsanto, reviewed and tested by Monsanto does not cut it for me.
Over 99% of genetic scientists say that GMO foods are safe for the planet and the environment. There are plenty of peer reviewed papers that support this claim as well. Even if there were a one in a million chance they were wrong, that just means that the scientists are just that right. It sounds like a safe and sound idea backed up by years of scientific research. So would you support GMO props that would reduce atmospheric co2?
Global Warming??? What Global Warming??
