Quote Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls View Post
If humans didn't tamper with "mother nature", then we would have no pets or technology. If we leave things up to "mother nature", why do you assume we would be better off? Chance-filled Mother Nature doesn't look out for us or any other species for that matter.
Tamper is too broad a word and I guess I shouldn't have used it. Tampering with nature has proved to be very beneficial for humans. Many of the alternate energy sources out there harness nature to produce for humans. This is great and I'm all for positive advances in technology that harness nature.

When we as humans start to play mix and match with the genetic make up of things in nature, how can we possibly foresee the outcomes? Even in controlled laboratory settings things have gotten out into the public that shouldn't have.

Even if the produced outcome is what scientist hypothesized, what about long term effects? How do we know glofish aren't going to evolve and wipe us out as a result of our genetic altering?

I never said we'd be better off if we left things up to mother nature, but I do think mother nature would be better off if we left it up to her.

Chanced filled mother nature may not look out for us, but that does not mean we should not look out for her.

It could be very beneficial or it could be devastating; when given those two evils I'd rather give up the benefit than experience the devastation.