The article seeks to explore the inter-play of scientific developments and their social inferences. Many times it happens that a particular scientific development is either not received well by the society, or else it causes a division amongst experts on the issue of its adoption for the societal benefit. One such instance concerns the commercial production of genetically modified (GM) food in India. The adoption of GM food has been marred with numerous controversies starting from Bt Cotton to Bt Brijnal, and Bt Mustard. The article seeks to explore the nature of this debate. It argues that the two sides of the debate – supporters of GM food and those who oppose it – do not argue in direct opposition to each other; they instead argue along different coordinates, and in a rather convincing manner. The contradiction only springs from the stand they take in the debate. However, for the common populace, the debate is perceived completely along ideological lines; in total ignorance of the “constituent arguments” of the debate. It is concluded that the “knowledge gaps” which exist out of the contestation between scientific facts and ideological positions, need to be embraced in order to achieve a more informed position in any debate. This is the lesson GM food debate teaches us.