When someone has a religious belief that want taught that is in defiance of science, they often say they do not want to replace science with their religion, they want to 'teach the controversy' about what science does not know and how belief can fill the gaps.
I am talking about food worship, of course, and the naturalistic fallacy that insists food was superior 20 years ago, or 40 years ago. Basically, whatever age someone is in order to be sentimental about what they ate.
One of those people must have taken over the reins at Costco, because an article issues forth with:
For decades, farmers have tinkered with plant biology in a quest for better crops. At first, they bred plants together to enhance some traits...
That is absolutely wrong, of course. Since the dawn of agriculture, some 12,000 years ago, humans have been genetically modifying nature. Here is how your delicious organic food without genetic modification:
Link: Ben Hayes on Twitter
As Alex Berezow at Real Clear Science notes, they discuss the benefits of GMOs too, but it is the sticky problem of false balance. It's a mistake to put global warming deniers side-by-side with all of climate science, just like it is a problem to put anti-GMO and anti-vaccine (well, they are the same anyway) people as being a legitimate alternative to science.
