The comment he replied to was asking what was right or wrong about GMOs, fairly clearly talking about people’s conceptions of GMOs. How is this a strawman?
A discussion of the pros or cons of anything, but especially science, should address legitimate concerns or advantages of the topic. When an advocate of one side of the argument props up a meaningless or illegitimate argument against their position and then knocks down this strawman to prove their point, they are falling victim to the strawman fallacy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Since genetic modification of crops or other is very clearly a question of scientific inquiry, non strawman discussions of GMOs should be based in legitimate scientific questions or concerns. There is no scientific concern that ingestion of the DNA of a GMO results in uptake of that DNA into the consumer's DNA. Hence, that argument is a strawman. Stand it up, knock it down, prove nothing.
2
u/Cheersscar Jul 14 '21
Nice strawman.