Objectively Gabi didn't touch on GMO at all. She never even answered the question. Objectively she used terrible arguments (Tuskegee had nothing to do with GMO, neither did Monsanto or Bayer, the 94 crime bill, Hillary Clinton, mass black incarceration all had nothing to do with the topic). In her first post she didn't say anything regarding GMO at all just posed a question. Even in her second and third post. Gabi's whole argument was that we shouldn't send it to them because we don't know what mutations or disease can come of them - which is irrelevant because we're all fed GMO here and have been for decades. There are programs like UN World Food Programme, etc that help out as well, and avoiding GMO still doesn't help famine and starvation which are a major problem. Not to mention pharmaceutical research like stem cell research and treatment drugs depend partly on GMO (it's not just food btw). Gabi's first post should have detailed the effects on plant and agricultural ecosystems that go extinct or are tremendously impacted (I.e. bees, crops, insect ecosystems, etc) or talked about why the Eurozone wants GMO labelled to begin with. None of that she addressed, which were major criticisms to the topic.
Cellar made excellent points, stayed on topic and in his third post, crushed any arguments she had. His first post could have been more detailed but he made up for that in his final post. My only criticism was that he didn't point out that she was using fallacies and straying from the topic, he also could have pointed out that because of the massive and growing human population, we can't sustain to make entirely organic food and feed everyone which would have been a terrific counter to arguments regarding why we shouldn't use them. I can't say much else cuz he stopped. But from an objective standpoint he did have the better argument.
