reminder: You may use the comparison organizer you completed from the Unit 5 and Unit 6 Introduction pages to help you formulate your response to the prompt. Please open the Rubric for this question so you know how you're graded. Prompt: In 5-10 sentences, explain your short analysis of the articles, "Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World" and "Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon" based upon our class discussions by answering these questions in paragraph form:Which excerpt makes the better argument?What%20makes%20this%20argument%20seem%20more%20effective?%20Use%20specific%20examples%20from%20both%20articles%20to%20support%20your%20analysis.%20Be%20sure%20to%20include:your%20claim,%20evidence%20with%20explanation,%20the%20counterclaim%20+%20refute,%20and%20a%20concluding%20sentence%20to%20wrap%20up%20your%20argumentStandard%20English%20Conventions%20(punctuation,%20capitalization,%20spelling,%20grammar)Check%20the%20%20Rubric%20for%20this%20question%20before%20submitting.

In analyzing the articles "Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World" and "Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon," the former presents a more compelling argument for the acceptance of genetically modified (GM) salmon. This article effectively appeals to the global need for sustainable food sources, emphasizing that GM salmon can significantly increase food production to meet the demands of a growing population. For instance, it highlights that GM salmon grow faster and require less feed, thereby conserving resources. This evidence illustrates the potential benefits of GM salmon in addressing food insecurity, making the argument more persuasive.

Conversely, "Say No to Genetically Engineered Salmon" raises valid concerns regarding the risks of GM salmon, particularly in terms of ecological impacts and consumer health. It argues that the introduction of GM species could disrupt local ecosystems and lead to unforeseen consequences, such as cross-breeding with wild salmon. However, while these concerns are legitimate, the article does not provide robust evidence or proposed solutions to mitigate these risks, which weakens its overall argument.

In conclusion, although both articles present important points, "Genetically Modified Salmon Can Feed the World" offers a clearer and more convincing argument by framing the issue within the critical context of global food shortages and sustainable practices. The effectiveness of its argument stems from its use of evidence that aligns with global needs, overshadowing the counterpoints made by the opposing article.