I've had discussions with people in which we disagreed on one thing or another, the other party usually taking the consensus view.
Then years later have that same party making the points I made way back when, because the consensus changed, as though our original discussion hadn't even taken place.
I've found that if I say "That's what I was saying to you years ago" I get a blank look, so I leave it be.
People that go along with consensus view points usually do it because they're not really giving the issue a lot of thought. If they're not giving it a lot of thought, they're likely not going to remember who said what; including what they said.
They're content within the comfort zone of consensus.
When I say consensus, I mean the consensus of the group, or groups, that they've chosen to identify with.
I thought this line in the article was interesting "Compared with typical insecticide sprays, the Bt toxins produced by genetically engineered crops are much safer for people and the environment, explained Yves Carrière, a professor of entomology in the UA College of Agriculture and Life Sciences who led the study."
All that really says is, these crops that produce their own toxins, are better than those that are bathed in poison.
That's like saying arsenic is better than cyanide.
Posted 1908 day(s) ago