Bill Truesdell wrote:
>look at the mixed bag we have with
>"weapons of mass destruction".  Be they nuclear, biological or chemical,
>all came out of basic research. And their impact makes GMO look benign.

        I don't know of any authority for this reassurance.  Many experts
think GMOs can cause mass destruction.


>But also out of that same basic research came a multitude of things that
>are beneficial for all of mankind. The truth is the good far outweighs
>the bad.

        I cannot agree that this is true of nuclear technology, which has
done far more harm than good.

        Ed 'father of the H-bomb' Teller testified to a USA Senate cttee
that to prohibit nuclear bomb tests in the atmosphere would be "against
knowledge".



James Fischer wrote:
>So, while we are now all (at long last) in agreement that there is no monster
>under the bed, the discussion should go on, just in case there MIGHT be
>monsters under the bed at some point in the future?

        This mocking tone should not be directed towards those who try to
peer over the horizon.  Those like me who have taken some interest in
gene-splicing since its main techniques were invented in the mid-1970s are
not so dismissive of fears.


>What possible future?  Bottom line, NO ONE is going to invest the small
>mountain of cold hard cash required to make a GM honey bee.  There are
>far too many "better markets" out there for GM products.  A "GM Super Bee"
>would never even pay back the sunk capital investment, let alone the salaries
>of the team that would have to work for about a decade or so to produce a
>"practical" GM bee.  I don't ever see a lucrative enough market to support
>this,
>even if every beekeeper planet-wide pledged to buy nothing else.

        These remarks reveal a lack of understanding of the modus operandi
of the gene-jockeys.  Billions of dollars have been poured into
gene-splicing capers that have yet to produce any 'GM products'.  That
James can't see any commercial sense in trying GM-bees is no test of
whether the gene-jockeys will try them.  Science-fiction fantasies abound
in this crazy DNA-fad.  Lack of technical feasibility & commercial
potential is  -  in this bizarre venture-capital bubble  -  little or no
barrier.


> at this point it has gone far beyond mere speculation,
>and is well into hallucination.  :)

        No-one could say this of Peter Borst's concerns if familiar with
the numerous rorts already pulled by the gene-jockeys.   The circumstantial
evidence is considerable that GM-bees will be attempted soon  - if not
already.  As I've remarked, Dr Mark Goodwin varroa tycoon of NZ has spoken
warmly of such prospects.

R