Let's start with ignoring basic science: (Fact: Genes do not act in isolation; changing a part produces an effect within the whole).
We'll disregard the volumes of evidence describing the unintended effects of genetic manipulation on transgenic organisms.
Let's avoid detailed information about unpredictable effects of altering genes in plants (Cellini, et al., 2004; Roessner, et al., 2000, etc.).
Why not just pretend that PCB-contaminated Anniston, Alabama, HB-933, and antibiotic-resistant genes induced by GM foods do not exist.
Let us take the Land Asset Division of Kamehameha Schools, Du Pont, Syngenta, and other multibillion-dollar entities at their (nonlabeled) word.
All we will ask is that those producing and selling GMO crops and leasing land for their growth produce definitive evidence that the use of GMOs, over time, is safe for human and animal consumption, nontoxic to our land, water and air, and not increasing the dependence of Third World countries on corporations through the forced seed-purchase "technology fee."
Following faulty logic, if we ignore all "research/opinions of GMO opponents," we are still left with the assumption of safety of GMOs.
Great PR campaign, Monsanto, but I'm not hinging the safety of my community's food supply on faulty assumptions.
Bridget Kaumeheiwa Velasco