Meat eaters are destroying the planet, warns WWF report

[Pickman's model]

Interesting how you use the term "lies" so easily, as I have not "refused" to engage with any argument - if there is an argument I haven't addressed it's because I missed it.

if you look back at your post 2417 you'll see that you claim to have read the post (you can't re-read something you haven't read the first time)

Then don't claim to have presented an argument that I supposedly missed either. We're also not a "sending people off on useless quests re-reading previous posts looking for non-existent arguments" society, I hope?

i never said you missed the post. so i don't know where you get this 'supposedly' from. i didn't suppose it. it's a lie to say i said, suggested or implied you missed it.

 

[Larry Noppius]

Vegan milk?

Epidemiological evidence...with a hazard ratio ranging from 1.15 to 1.20 in different cohorts

 

[editor]

Here's an interesting article.

Actor Liam Hemsworth got kidney stones because of a vegan diet.

Actor Liam Hemsworth got kidney stones because of a vegan diet. Here's how - Times of India

The 30-year-old actor admitted that he underwent surgery for his kidney stones, which was probably linked to eating so many vegetables, as part of his vegan diet.

m.timesofindia.com

Yes. One person I've never heard of having health problems is really, really really, really interesting.

 

[two sheds]

Yes, you claimed I had told people to change their beliefs to conform with mine. You were asked to provide a quote but failed to do so, you only provided a quote in which I said no such thing, which was then pointed out to you.

Where did you do that then?

Look, this isn't an argument. Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

 

[Larry Noppius]

if you look back at your post 2417 you'll see that you claim to have read the post (you can't re-read something you haven't read the first time)

I did read the post, it just didn't contain an argument. It contained an assertion that other animals (not bred for their meat) would continue existing. For it to be an argument there would also have to be a reasoning as to how that refutes that the animals which do get bred for their meat would stop existing if people stopped eating meat.

i never said you missed the post. so i don't know where you get this 'supposedly' from. i didn't suppose it. it's a lie to say i said, suggested or implied you missed it.

True, you assumed willful refusal to engage with an argument as an explanation, rather than just having missed it.

 

[Larry Noppius]

Where did you do that then?

Right here:

Not at all. Why would I argue they should change that behaviour? To the contrary, I think it would be fun having people argue that these animals would continue to exist even if people stopped eating meat.

Look, this isn't an argument. Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of anything the other person says.

If your argument is a strawman then there's not much to do but contradicting it. Why should I argue a position I've never claimed (that others should change their beliefs on the subject to conform to my own), merely because you apparently want me to claim it?

 

[two sheds]

Right here:
Not at all. Why would I argue they should change that behaviour? To the contrary, I think it would be fun having people argue that these animals would continue to exist even if people stopped eating meat.

That's just toss. Why are you arguing with people on a bulletin board except to demonstrate that you're right and they're wrong. You're just fooling yourself. It's no argument to say that you could be arguing in your spare time. No intellectual value in that.

If your argument is a strawman then there's not much to do but contradicting it. Why should I argue a position I've never claimed (that others should change their beliefs on the subject to conform to my own), merely because you apparently want me to claim it?

Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position. But it isn't just saying 'no it isn't'.

Anyway your five minutes are up. I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to argue any more.

 

[deeyo]

Vegan milk?

Nope. Diary products, for the calcium. A 'balanced vegetarian diet' is probably the best if you want to avoid kidney stones.

 

[Pickman's model]

I did read the post, it just didn't contain an argument. It contained an assertion that other animals (not bred for their meat) would continue existing. For it to be an argument there would also have to be a reasoning as to how that refutes that the animals which do get bred for their meat would stop existing if people stopped eating meat.



True, you assumed willful refusal to engage with an argument as an explanation, rather than just having missed it.

you can't argue, your I'm not sure doesn't convince. Your pedantry does you as much credit as your want of honesty.

 

[Larry Noppius]

That's just toss. Why are you arguing with people on a bulletin board except to demonstrate that you're right and they're wrong. You're just fooling yourself. It's no argument to say that you could be arguing in your spare time. No intellectual value in that.

If I was arguing with people on a bulletin board because I want to demonstrate that I'm right and they're wrong then I obviously don't want them to hold the same beliefs I do, because otherwise there would be nothing to demonstrate them wrong about, now would there? You're being incoherent.

 

[two sheds]

If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

 

[Larry Noppius]

you can't argue, your I'm not sure doesn't convince. Your pedantry does you as much credit as your want of honesty.

That's rich coming from you, someone who accused me of refusing to engage with an argument (that you chose this explanation rather than that I may have simply missed an argument I'll consider a projection of your own bad-faith engagement) and then having to admit to not having made any argument.

 

[Larry Noppius]

If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

Why would I want you to go on arguing? You haven't even argued at all yet, all you've done is making up a strawman claiming I was telling people how to behave and then complaining when it didn't work.

 

[editor]

That's rich coming from you, someone who accused me of refusing to engage with an argument (that you chose this explanation rather than that I may have simply missed an argument I'll consider a projection of your own bad-faith engagement) and then having to admit to not having made any argument.

Have you remembered the names of all these posters are who were "wishing some species out of existence" like you claimed earlier?

 

[two sheds]

Why would I want you to go on arguing? You haven't even argued at all yet, all you've done is making up a strawman claiming I was telling people how to behave and then complaining when it didn't work.

I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you pay.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you pay.

Pay as you woe

 

[Pickman's model]

That's rich coming from you, someone who accused me of refusing to engage with an argument (that you chose this explanation rather than that I may have simply missed an argument I'll consider a projection of your own bad-faith engagement) and then having to admit to not having made any argument.

Your bad faith is manifest in your declaration that an argument is only an argument if you recognise it as an argument. Your bad faith is manifest in your mendacity. And your bad faith is manifest in your hypocrisy.

 

[WouldBe]

But you're absolutely fine with framing a discussion around a makey uppey word invented by random bozo on the internet that almost no one has the slightest clue what it means? Maybe we could all start making up our own stupid words in this thread to make it really fucking infantile?

I think you will find that there isn't a single word in the history of mankind in any language, including Welsh, that didn't start out as a 'makey uppey' word.

 

[editor]

I think you will find that there isn't a single word in the history of mankind in any language, including Welsh, that didn't start out as a 'makey uppey' word.

I think you'll find that dismissive, makey uppey words used by about three people on a single thread on a relatively tiny forum read by a microscopically small amount of internet users have very, very little chance of making it into any language, particularly when they sound as ridiculous as this one.

 

[WouldBe]

You'd prefer I suspect to see cows, sheep, pigs, chicken continue to live lives filled with cruelty rather than see these artificial species die out. You'd likely prefer to see great swathes of food raised to feed these unfortunate animals than to feed humans.

If you don't kill these animals or let them die out what are they supposed to live on?

 

[xenon]

Are you deliberately missing the point? Gassing chickens is cruel therefor a more humane method should be used to kill them -> no problem. Gassing chickens is cruel therefor those chickens should never have existed in the first place -> either eugenics (if the same argument is equally applied to humans) or "speciesism" (if it isn't).

Every sperm is sacred....

 

[ddraig]

WouldBe
scraping the barrel again!

 

[xenon]

Controception = genecide.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Controception = genecide.

Contra - Against/opposite

 

[Humberto]

Contra - Against/opposite

Guys blind.

 

[two sheds]

Contro = against, contra

Contro Definition & Meaning | YourDictionary

Contro definition: <a>Against</a>; see contra-.

www.yourdictionary.com

 

[Pickman's model]

If you don't kill these animals or let them die out what are they supposed to live on?

Whatever ruminants and poultry normally eat of course

 

[Saul Goodman]

Whatever ruminants and poultry normally eat of course

I didn't realise you were a 'vegigan', but I do know you're not daft, so what are your views on achieving a 'vegigan' populous? Do you believe it would be sustainable, and better for the planet, given the amount of fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides necessary to sustain such a lifestyle choice?

 

[WouldBe]

Whatever ruminants and poultry normally eat of course

In the case of poultry then grain thy could be eaten by humans. Or do all the chickens need retraining before release to gather their eggs, take them to market to sell so they can buy some grain?

 

[xenon]

Contra - Against/opposite

Contracepive = opposite of conception = genecide. If Larry's logic is followed.