|
Sodomite Ron wrote:
>>>>>>>>>I have no way of knowing what farmers do what. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Stop feigning ignorance and innocence. You know they intentionally >>>>>>>>poison them and less intentionally run over and flood them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I don't know which do this, if they really do. >>>>>> >>>>>>Bullshit. You know that most farmers don't employ the tactics of the >>>>>>Lundbergs to clear the fields of migratory birds (but not rodents, >>>>>>amphibians, etc.). You know that the use of pesticides kills a variety >>>>>>of non-targeted species. You know that storage facilities like granaries >>>>>>and warehouses pro-actively employ pest control measures in accordance >>>>>>with health agency requirements. >>>>> >>>>>Well then, any educated fool >>>> >>>>Glad you're here to speak for the educated fool community. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>can see the difficulty is not in veganism >>>> >>>>It *is*, but an educated fool is still a fool. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>but in the whores who are the growers and farmers. >>>> >>>>Whores who cut certain corners to fulfill even *more whorish* consumer >>>>demand for the least expensive products possible. Most consumers care >>>>nothing about dead mice or rats or frogs, they just want their food. >>>>Vegans, who brazenly lie about the impact their diet has on animals, >>>>have failed to address the issue of alternative production which might >>>>actually help their consumption match their rhetoric. They're hypocrites >>>>of the grandest magnitude. >>> >>> >>>You still suffer the delusion that other must follow your standards. >> >>I insist others who pontificate about such things make some effort to >>meet or exceed their own standards. > > I see. No, you don't. |
Sodomite Ron wrote:
>>>>>>>>>I have no way of knowing what farmers do what. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Stop feigning ignorance and innocence. You know they intentionally >>>>>>>>poison them and less intentionally run over and flood them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I don't know which do this, if they really do. >>>>>> >>>>>>Bullshit. You know that most farmers don't employ the tactics of the >>>>>>Lundbergs to clear the fields of migratory birds (but not rodents, >>>>>>amphibians, etc.). You know that the use of pesticides kills a variety >>>>>>of non-targeted species. You know that storage facilities like granaries >>>>>>and warehouses pro-actively employ pest control measures in accordance >>>>>>with health agency requirements. >>>>> >>>>>Well then, any educated fool >>>> >>>>Glad you're here to speak for the educated fool community. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>can see the difficulty is not in veganism >>>> >>>>It *is*, but an educated fool is still a fool. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>but in the whores who are the growers and farmers. >>>> >>>>Whores who cut certain corners to fulfill even *more whorish* consumer >>>>demand for the least expensive products possible. Most consumers care >>>>nothing about dead mice or rats or frogs, they just want their food. >>>>Vegans, who brazenly lie about the impact their diet has on animals, >>>>have failed to address the issue of alternative production which might >>>>actually help their consumption match their rhetoric. They're hypocrites >>>>of the grandest magnitude. >>> >>> >>>You still suffer the delusion that other must follow your standards. >> >>I insist others who pontificate about such things make some effort to >>meet or exceed their own standards. > > I see. No, you don't. |
In article >,
usual suspect > wrote: > Sodomite Ron wrote: > >>>>>>>>>I have no way of knowing what farmers do what. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Stop feigning ignorance and innocence. You know they intentionally > >>>>>>>>poison them and less intentionally run over and flood them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I don't know which do this, if they really do. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Bullshit. You know that most farmers don't employ the tactics of the > >>>>>>Lundbergs to clear the fields of migratory birds (but not rodents, > >>>>>>amphibians, etc.). You know that the use of pesticides kills a variety > >>>>>>of non-targeted species. You know that storage facilities like > >>>>>>granaries > >>>>>>and warehouses pro-actively employ pest control measures in accordance > >>>>>>with health agency requirements. > >>>>> > >>>>>Well then, any educated fool > >>>> > >>>>Glad you're here to speak for the educated fool community. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>can see the difficulty is not in veganism > >>>> > >>>>It *is*, but an educated fool is still a fool. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>but in the whores who are the growers and farmers. > >>>> > >>>>Whores who cut certain corners to fulfill even *more whorish* consumer > >>>>demand for the least expensive products possible. Most consumers care > >>>>nothing about dead mice or rats or frogs, they just want their food. > >>>>Vegans, who brazenly lie about the impact their diet has on animals, > >>>>have failed to address the issue of alternative production which might > >>>>actually help their consumption match their rhetoric. They're hypocrites > >>>>of the grandest magnitude. > >>> > >>> > >>>You still suffer the delusion that other must follow your standards. > >> > >>I insist others who pontificate about such things make some effort to > >>meet or exceed their own standards. > > > > I see. > > No, you don't. More editing. I've come to expect it of you. The "usual suspect" would be appropriate then. |
In article >,
usual suspect > wrote: > Sodomite Ron wrote: > >>>>>>>>>I have no way of knowing what farmers do what. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>Stop feigning ignorance and innocence. You know they intentionally > >>>>>>>>poison them and less intentionally run over and flood them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>I don't know which do this, if they really do. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>Bullshit. You know that most farmers don't employ the tactics of the > >>>>>>Lundbergs to clear the fields of migratory birds (but not rodents, > >>>>>>amphibians, etc.). You know that the use of pesticides kills a variety > >>>>>>of non-targeted species. You know that storage facilities like > >>>>>>granaries > >>>>>>and warehouses pro-actively employ pest control measures in accordance > >>>>>>with health agency requirements. > >>>>> > >>>>>Well then, any educated fool > >>>> > >>>>Glad you're here to speak for the educated fool community. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>can see the difficulty is not in veganism > >>>> > >>>>It *is*, but an educated fool is still a fool. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>but in the whores who are the growers and farmers. > >>>> > >>>>Whores who cut certain corners to fulfill even *more whorish* consumer > >>>>demand for the least expensive products possible. Most consumers care > >>>>nothing about dead mice or rats or frogs, they just want their food. > >>>>Vegans, who brazenly lie about the impact their diet has on animals, > >>>>have failed to address the issue of alternative production which might > >>>>actually help their consumption match their rhetoric. They're hypocrites > >>>>of the grandest magnitude. > >>> > >>> > >>>You still suffer the delusion that other must follow your standards. > >> > >>I insist others who pontificate about such things make some effort to > >>meet or exceed their own standards. > > > > I see. > > No, you don't. More editing. I've come to expect it of you. The "usual suspect" would be appropriate then. |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> >> >> > You say "widely available >> >> >> > products...those include certain kinds of meat" What >> >> >> > non-meat products do you refer to that lower cds? >> >> >> >> >> >> Locally grown produce and grains. Grow your own -- check out > some >> > of >> >> >> those community garden links I gave you a few weeks ago. >> >> > >> >> > How are locally grown plants lower in cds than plants from >> >> > elsewhere? >> >> ================== >> >> Are you really that stupid, or do you work really really hard at > it? >> > Does >> >> those imported fruits and veggies just drop out of the sky and land > on >> > your >> >> plate like manna from heaven? You are so totally ignorant of the >> > impact >> >> your life has on animals and the environemnt the world over that it >> > makes my >> >> head spin. How can anybody be so willfully stupid? >> > >> > Well, if you think that the transportation industry is causing >> > deaths speak up ricky. >> ================== >> And you don't? Like I said, you're just too stupid to have done > *any* >> research into your impact on animals and the environment. > > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international, > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? =========================== If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is that you don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point of acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you use imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? > > You certainly have some overly high expectations of > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous > expectations. ==================== LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of spewing that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the simple rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. Obviously you care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death and suffering. > >> > I have nothing against imported foods. Farmers markets are >> > fine though limited. I like a mix of local and imported. >> ================== >> Why? There is no necessaty to importing foods for your diet. Again, > you do >> it for your selfish reasons. Proving yet again that saving animals is > not a >> real concern to you. > >> Many rodents get to know the growing patterns >> > of their food, and will bury and store food during times >> > of plenty for leaner times. >> ======================== >> ROTFLMAO What a hoot!!! > > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents > is a well known fact. ====================== Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that compassionate, killer? > >> > The vegan can get all the nutrition needed to be healthy. >> ===================== >> No, they cannot naturally from the foods they eat. Unless of course > you >> like to eat crap.... > > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. ==================== You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research you've claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to depending on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra killing you propose, hypocrite? > >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. >> >> ======================= >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that >> > proclaims >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and then >> > m,akes no >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. >> > >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. >> =============== >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' > sites, >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... > > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > though it's a good one. ================ Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. >> >> ================== >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you killer? >> > >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? >> ================== >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted > now, and >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. > > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. ================== Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve their impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you want to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the world,' fool? > > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> >> >> > You say "widely available >> >> >> > products...those include certain kinds of meat" What >> >> >> > non-meat products do you refer to that lower cds? >> >> >> >> >> >> Locally grown produce and grains. Grow your own -- check out > some >> > of >> >> >> those community garden links I gave you a few weeks ago. >> >> > >> >> > How are locally grown plants lower in cds than plants from >> >> > elsewhere? >> >> ================== >> >> Are you really that stupid, or do you work really really hard at > it? >> > Does >> >> those imported fruits and veggies just drop out of the sky and land > on >> > your >> >> plate like manna from heaven? You are so totally ignorant of the >> > impact >> >> your life has on animals and the environemnt the world over that it >> > makes my >> >> head spin. How can anybody be so willfully stupid? >> > >> > Well, if you think that the transportation industry is causing >> > deaths speak up ricky. >> ================== >> And you don't? Like I said, you're just too stupid to have done > *any* >> research into your impact on animals and the environment. > > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international, > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? =========================== If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is that you don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point of acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you use imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? > > You certainly have some overly high expectations of > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous > expectations. ==================== LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of spewing that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the simple rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. Obviously you care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death and suffering. > >> > I have nothing against imported foods. Farmers markets are >> > fine though limited. I like a mix of local and imported. >> ================== >> Why? There is no necessaty to importing foods for your diet. Again, > you do >> it for your selfish reasons. Proving yet again that saving animals is > not a >> real concern to you. > >> Many rodents get to know the growing patterns >> > of their food, and will bury and store food during times >> > of plenty for leaner times. >> ======================== >> ROTFLMAO What a hoot!!! > > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents > is a well known fact. ====================== Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that compassionate, killer? > >> > The vegan can get all the nutrition needed to be healthy. >> ===================== >> No, they cannot naturally from the foods they eat. Unless of course > you >> like to eat crap.... > > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. ==================== You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research you've claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to depending on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra killing you propose, hypocrite? > >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. >> >> ======================= >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that >> > proclaims >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and then >> > m,akes no >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. >> > >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. >> =============== >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' > sites, >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... > > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > though it's a good one. ================ Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. >> >> ================== >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you killer? >> > >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? >> ================== >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted > now, and >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. > > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. ================== Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve their impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you want to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the world,' fool? > > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > |
> > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international,
> > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans > > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? > =========================== > If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is that you > don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point of > acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you use > imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Why do you call it MY spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your cd expectations of us. > > You certainly have some overly high expectations of > > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's > > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous > > expectations. > ==================== > LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of spewing > that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the simple > rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. Obviously you > care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death and > suffering. My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and foremost for health reasons. I know that I've also happened to reduce cds in my dietary change and that makes me happy too. Stop demanding that vegans eliminate ALL cds everywhere. That's impossible in todays world. I'm content with the dent I've made. Don't demand that it be bigger. It's not up to you. > > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents > > is a well known fact. > ====================== > Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their nests > while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that compassionate, > killer? On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. > > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's > > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. > ==================== > You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research you've > claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to depending > on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big > industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra killing > you propose, hypocrite? I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. > >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do > >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. > >> >> ======================= > >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that > >> > proclaims > >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and then > >> > m,akes no > >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an > >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. > >> > > >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, > >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe > >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, > >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. > >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. > >> =============== > >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' > > sites, > >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... > > > > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > > though it's a good one. > ================ > Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other stuff there. I'm sure some sites are 'activist'. Some are religious, some promote health reasons, some just want to share their recipes. Doesn't matter. It's the recipes I read and list. > >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their > >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps > >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer > >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand > >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers > >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. > >> >> ================== > >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you killer? > >> > > >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any > >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? > >> ================== > >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted > > now, and > >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. > > > > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed > > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. > ================== > Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve their > impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you want > to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the world,' > fool? Why not talk about the masses? The reality is that the masses affect the world around us. What are the apples and oranges you're talking about? If ALL individuals took your advise, demand would exceed supply big time. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
> > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international,
> > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans > > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? > =========================== > If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is that you > don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point of > acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you use > imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Why do you call it MY spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your cd expectations of us. > > You certainly have some overly high expectations of > > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's > > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous > > expectations. > ==================== > LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of spewing > that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the simple > rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. Obviously you > care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death and > suffering. My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and foremost for health reasons. I know that I've also happened to reduce cds in my dietary change and that makes me happy too. Stop demanding that vegans eliminate ALL cds everywhere. That's impossible in todays world. I'm content with the dent I've made. Don't demand that it be bigger. It's not up to you. > > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents > > is a well known fact. > ====================== > Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their nests > while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that compassionate, > killer? On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. > > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's > > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. > ==================== > You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research you've > claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to depending > on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big > industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra killing > you propose, hypocrite? I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. > >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do > >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. > >> >> ======================= > >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that > >> > proclaims > >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and then > >> > m,akes no > >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an > >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. > >> > > >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, > >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe > >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, > >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. > >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. > >> =============== > >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' > > sites, > >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... > > > > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > > though it's a good one. > ================ > Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other stuff there. I'm sure some sites are 'activist'. Some are religious, some promote health reasons, some just want to share their recipes. Doesn't matter. It's the recipes I read and list. > >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their > >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps > >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer > >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand > >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers > >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. > >> >> ================== > >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you killer? > >> > > >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any > >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? > >> ================== > >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted > > now, and > >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. > > > > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed > > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. > ================== > Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve their > impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you want > to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the world,' > fool? Why not talk about the masses? The reality is that the masses affect the world around us. What are the apples and oranges you're talking about? If ALL individuals took your advise, demand would exceed supply big time. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Scented Nectar wrote:
<...> > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > Why do you call it MY > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > cd expectations of us. You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via your own consumption. <...> > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > foremost for health reasons. Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad generalizations you picked up from activists. > I know that I've also happened > to reduce cds in my dietary change How many CDs have been reduced by your dietary change? > I'm content with the dent I've made. You haven't made a dent. <...> >>Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their >>nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that >>compassionate, killer? > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. You're pulling this out of your acne-scarred ass. Most organic farms are "commercial" farms. Organic farms use pesticides. They use machines to sow, fertilize, and harvest crops. You're either ignorant or have managed to reach a completely delusional state about the realities of organic production -- that somehow it's idyllic and peaceful. The reality is there's *no* significant difference between methods other than the fact that conventional crop production may include use of synthetic pestcides and fertilizers and are also routinely monitored for pesticide residues. Organic crops allow the use of natural versions of the *very same* pesticides and are NOT monitored for residues (despite the fact that many of the natural pesticides are equally dangerous as the synthetics). Furthermore, the most common organic fertilizers include parts of dead animals -- fish emulsion, fish meal, blood meal, bone, etc. <...> > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. So much for your fraudulent claim that you've researched all this stuff for years. It's SOLGAR. Dummy. <...> >>>I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the >>>recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even >>>though it's a good one. >> >>================ >>Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > stuff there. Why do you parrot it verbatim, Polly? <...> |
Scented Nectar wrote:
<...> > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > Why do you call it MY > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > cd expectations of us. You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via your own consumption. <...> > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > foremost for health reasons. Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad generalizations you picked up from activists. > I know that I've also happened > to reduce cds in my dietary change How many CDs have been reduced by your dietary change? > I'm content with the dent I've made. You haven't made a dent. <...> >>Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their >>nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that >>compassionate, killer? > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. You're pulling this out of your acne-scarred ass. Most organic farms are "commercial" farms. Organic farms use pesticides. They use machines to sow, fertilize, and harvest crops. You're either ignorant or have managed to reach a completely delusional state about the realities of organic production -- that somehow it's idyllic and peaceful. The reality is there's *no* significant difference between methods other than the fact that conventional crop production may include use of synthetic pestcides and fertilizers and are also routinely monitored for pesticide residues. Organic crops allow the use of natural versions of the *very same* pesticides and are NOT monitored for residues (despite the fact that many of the natural pesticides are equally dangerous as the synthetics). Furthermore, the most common organic fertilizers include parts of dead animals -- fish emulsion, fish meal, blood meal, bone, etc. <...> > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. So much for your fraudulent claim that you've researched all this stuff for years. It's SOLGAR. Dummy. <...> >>>I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the >>>recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even >>>though it's a good one. >> >>================ >>Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > stuff there. Why do you parrot it verbatim, Polly? <...> |
CORRECTION
usual suspect wrote: <...> > The reality is there's *no* significant difference between methods other > than the fact that conventional crop production may include use of > synthetic pestcides and fertilizers and are also routinely monitored for > pesticide residues. Organic crops allow the use of natural versions of > the *very same* pesticides and are NOT monitored for residues (despite > the fact that many of the natural pesticides are equally dangerous as > the synthetics). Parenthesis should read: despite the fact that the natural pesticides are equally dangerous as the synthetics. There's no significant difference in the toxicity of either conventional or organic pesticides, just that conventional ones are tested and limited in use while organics are neither tested nor limited for application on crops. <...> |
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Nectar wrote: > <...> > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). > > Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. > > Why do you call it MY > > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > > cd expectations of us. > > You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own > virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via > your own consumption. In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > > foremost for health reasons. > > Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad > generalizations you picked up from activists. I've been researching much longer than any activist websites have been around, in fact, before there was a web. > > I know that I've also happened > > to reduce cds in my dietary change > > How many CDs have been reduced by your dietary change? I don't know the exact number, only the relativety to my previous meateating diet. I know I've caused a reduction of cds, but don't know how many, only comparatively when comparing vegan to meateating. > > I'm content with the dent I've made. > > You haven't made a dent. It's not one you'd see. > >>Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their > >>nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that > >>compassionate, killer? > > > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. > > You're pulling this out of your acne-scarred ass. Most organic farms are > "commercial" farms. Organic farms use pesticides. They use machines to > sow, fertilize, and harvest crops. You're either ignorant or have > managed to reach a completely delusional state about the realities of > organic production -- that somehow it's idyllic and peaceful. On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing chemicals that turn their insides to mush. As far as the slow moving machines go, I think there's been a bit of exaggeration regarding the numbers you trolls would like us to believe. > > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. > > So much for your fraudulent claim that you've researched all this stuff > for years. It's SOLGAR. Dummy. Learning about Solgar is quite recent for me. I does not invalidate any of my previous learning. > >>>I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > >>>recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > >>>though it's a good one. > >> > >>================ > >>Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > > stuff there. > > Why do you parrot it verbatim, Polly? Are you sure I do? I think up all my own words. If they are parroting me verbatim, I'd like to know where, so I can ask them to stop. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
"usual suspect" > wrote in message
... > Scented Nectar wrote: > <...> > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). > > Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. > > Why do you call it MY > > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > > cd expectations of us. > > You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own > virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via > your own consumption. In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > > foremost for health reasons. > > Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad > generalizations you picked up from activists. I've been researching much longer than any activist websites have been around, in fact, before there was a web. > > I know that I've also happened > > to reduce cds in my dietary change > > How many CDs have been reduced by your dietary change? I don't know the exact number, only the relativety to my previous meateating diet. I know I've caused a reduction of cds, but don't know how many, only comparatively when comparing vegan to meateating. > > I'm content with the dent I've made. > > You haven't made a dent. It's not one you'd see. > >>Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their > >>nests while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that > >>compassionate, killer? > > > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. > > You're pulling this out of your acne-scarred ass. Most organic farms are > "commercial" farms. Organic farms use pesticides. They use machines to > sow, fertilize, and harvest crops. You're either ignorant or have > managed to reach a completely delusional state about the realities of > organic production -- that somehow it's idyllic and peaceful. On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing chemicals that turn their insides to mush. As far as the slow moving machines go, I think there's been a bit of exaggeration regarding the numbers you trolls would like us to believe. > > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. > > So much for your fraudulent claim that you've researched all this stuff > for years. It's SOLGAR. Dummy. Learning about Solgar is quite recent for me. I does not invalidate any of my previous learning. > >>>I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the > >>>recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even > >>>though it's a good one. > >> > >>================ > >>Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > > stuff there. > > Why do you parrot it verbatim, Polly? Are you sure I do? I think up all my own words. If they are parroting me verbatim, I'd like to know where, so I can ask them to stop. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Scented Nectar wrote: > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > > Scented Nectar wrote: > > <...> > > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > > > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). > > > > Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > > Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. > > > > Why do you call it MY > > > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > > > cd expectations of us. > > > > You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own > > virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via > > your own consumption. > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that number? <snip> |
Scented Nectar wrote: > "usual suspect" > wrote in message > ... > > Scented Nectar wrote: > > <...> > > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > > > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). > > > > Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > > Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. > > > > Why do you call it MY > > > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > > > cd expectations of us. > > > > You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own > > virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via > > your own consumption. > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that number? <snip> |
> > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep
> > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > > > Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have > you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that > number? Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of crops just to make one pound of meat. The larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, I'm left with products that are lower cd, since it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to raise vegan food. No exact numbers for you, just logic. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Scented Nectar wrote: > > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > > > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > > > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > > > > > > Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have > > you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that > > number? > > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. NOT huge, huge, sorry. Estimates range from 1.5 to 3 pounds, once you factor in that most aniaml feeds aren't useful to humans. You can't eat grass, for example. > The > larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Not necessarily. A pound of rice may cause more CD's than a pound of grass-fed beef. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. No exact numbers for > you, just logic. Faulty, weak, lazy logic. It is exact numbers you must provide to make any kind of point. A pound of hunted venison certainly comes at less CD cost than a pound of rice. Do you still eat rice? |
Scented Nectar wrote: > > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > > > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > > > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > > > > > > Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have > > you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that > > number? > > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. NOT huge, huge, sorry. Estimates range from 1.5 to 3 pounds, once you factor in that most aniaml feeds aren't useful to humans. You can't eat grass, for example. > The > larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Not necessarily. A pound of rice may cause more CD's than a pound of grass-fed beef. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. No exact numbers for > you, just logic. Faulty, weak, lazy logic. It is exact numbers you must provide to make any kind of point. A pound of hunted venison certainly comes at less CD cost than a pound of rice. Do you still eat rice? |
Scented Nectar wrote:
>><...> >> >>>Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery >>>and clothes (I'd get arrested!). >> >>Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > > Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. What wife, you dingbat? I have a girlfriend. She's not going anywhere. >>>Why do you call it MY >>>spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your >>>cd expectations of us. >> >>You're the ones who prate incessantly about dead animals and your own >>virtue despite the fact that you still contribute to animal deaths via >>your own consumption. > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. What reduction? How many fewer animals die as a result of your consumption now than did just a month ago? >>>My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and >>>foremost for health reasons. >> >>Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad >>generalizations you picked up from activists. > > I've been researching much longer than any activist > websites have been around, in fact, before there > was a web. You're either a liar or you've nothing to show for all this supposed "research." >>>I know that I've also happened >>>to reduce cds in my dietary change >> >>How many CDs have been reduced by your dietary change? > > I don't know the exact number, Then how the **** do you know the score in your own life, dingbat? > only the relativety to > my previous meateating diet. All you have is the shoddy, inaccurate comparison of a diet that included meat and one that doesn't. Since you're not keeping any kind of score, you have no clue how many or how few deaths you're really causing. Everything on your part is a matter of wild-assed conjecture and best hopes. In short, your new-found sanctimony suits you well. > I know You KNOW nothing. You assume (wrongly) that you're causing fewer deaths merely on the basis that you're not consuming meat. > I've caused a reduction of cds, Are you keeping score other than trying to bullshit that "I don't eat meat, therefore no animal (or fewer animals) died in the production of my meals"? No. You're bluffing. You can fool yourself (and oviously you're quite good at it), but you're not fooling anyone else. > but don't know how many, Precisely. You didn't know how many before, you don't know how many now, and your blasé attitude pretty much points in the direction that you'll never know because you're only concerned about your own self-righteousness, not about animals. > only comparatively when comparing vegan to meateating. IOW, comparing apples and oranges through generalizations than through specifics. >>>I'm content with the dent I've made. >> >>You haven't made a dent. > > It's not one you'd see. It sure as hell isn't one YOU see, either, by your own accounting. <...> >>>On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as >>>fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. >> >>You're pulling this out of your acne-scarred ass. Most organic farms >>are "commercial" farms. Organic farms use pesticides. They use machines to >>sow, fertilize, and harvest crops. You're either ignorant or have >>managed to reach a completely delusional state about the realities of >>organic production -- that somehow it's idyllic and peaceful. > > On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing > chemicals that turn their insides to mush. Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few details I can pass along to show otherwise: Organic pesticides cause cancer in rodents (and humans): One of organic farming's most widely used pesticides--pyrethrum--has been classified as a ``likely human carcinogen.'' An advisory committee to the Environmental Protection Agency made the classification two years ago, after pyrethrum caused higher-than-normal numbers of tumors in two different sets of laboratory rodents. http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articl...1/jun_8_01.htm Organic pesticides induce Parkinson's Disease-like symptoms in rodents (and humans): Rotenone, a commonly used organic pesticide, has attracted a lot of attention in Dr. Greenamyre's lab. In past studies, Dr. Greenamyre and colleagues found that rotenone can induce major features of PD in rats, including slowness, stiffness and tremor. Published in Nature Neuroscience in November 2000, these results support the idea that chronic exposure to environmental pesticides may contribute to the incidence of Parkinson's disease in humans. With the new funding, Dr. Greenamyre will continue to research rodent and cell models of PD to determine which genes cause susceptibility or resistance to the PD-inducing effects of pesticides. http://www.scienceblog.com/community.../20022444.html Organic pesticides affect more than just target species: Some organic pesticides may be toxic to nontargets. http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/public...are/which.html Organic pesticides are as toxic as their synthetic counterparts, and many of them are banned under the Rotterdam Convention: The Convention has already been signed by 73 countries – including Brazil – and ratified by 18. It will come into effect once there are 50 signatory countries.The original products list included 22 organic pesticides considered to be highly toxic... http://www.nex.org.br/english/denuci...enenamento.htm Finally, but not because I'm out of ammo on the subject, an organic pesticide called Dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane is banned because of its pervasive toxicity. You probably have heard of it by its initials: DDT. http://www.epa.gov/history/publications/formative6.htm > As far as the slow moving machines go, I think there's > been a bit of exaggeration regarding the numbers You've claimed that it's wrong to kill animals, period. It's amusing how relative your sense of morality is. >>>I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 >>>supplements. > >>>I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. >> >>So much for your fraudulent claim that you've researched all this >>stuff for years. It's SOLGAR. Dummy. > > Learning about Solgar is quite recent for me. Just like learning about CDs, omega FAs, organic pesticide dangers, etc. Aren't you lucky others have been around to help you. > I does not invalidate any of my previous learning. Be honest, Skunky: it's hard to invalidate what never even existed. >>>>>I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the >>>>>recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even >>>>>though it's a good one. >>>> >>>>================ >>>>Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. >>> >>>I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from >>>my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other >>>stuff there. >> >>Why do you parrot it verbatim, Polly? > > Are you sure I do? Absolutely. :-) |
Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >>>bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >>>all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >>> >> >>Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have >>you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that >>number? > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. No, it didn't. Much of the weight of an animal like a steer is put on from grazing on grass, not on grains. Animals are finished on grains to fatten (or marble) their meat. > The larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Ipse dixit. You're really clueless. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, Yves fake sausage?! Lundberg rice?! Plantains from Central America??! > since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. How much wheat does it take to make gluten? How much soy to make protein? How much of the two crops does it take to make a pound of ****ing fake sausage? Hint: a lot more than it takes to raise animals like turkeys and rabbits, as I showed you a few weeks ago. > No exact numbers Naturally! Why should you actually perform body counts to see if you're consumption matches your bloviated rhetoric. > for you, just logic. There's no numbers and no logic, either. |
Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >>>bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >>>all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >>> >> >>Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have >>you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that >>number? > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. No, it didn't. Much of the weight of an animal like a steer is put on from grazing on grass, not on grains. Animals are finished on grains to fatten (or marble) their meat. > The larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Ipse dixit. You're really clueless. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, Yves fake sausage?! Lundberg rice?! Plantains from Central America??! > since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. How much wheat does it take to make gluten? How much soy to make protein? How much of the two crops does it take to make a pound of ****ing fake sausage? Hint: a lot more than it takes to raise animals like turkeys and rabbits, as I showed you a few weeks ago. > No exact numbers Naturally! Why should you actually perform body counts to see if you're consumption matches your bloviated rhetoric. > for you, just logic. There's no numbers and no logic, either. |
Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >>>bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >>>all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >>> >> >>Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have >>you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that >>number? > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. No, it didn't. Much of the weight of an animal like a steer is put on from grazing on grass, not on grains. Animals are finished on grains to fatten (or marble) their meat. > The larger the crop use, the more cds there are. Ipse dixit. You're really clueless. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, Yves fake sausage?! Lundberg rice?! Plantains from Central America??! > since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. How much wheat does it take to make gluten? How much soy to make protein? How much of the two crops does it take to make a pound of ****ing fake sausage? Hint: a lot more than it takes to raise animals like turkeys and rabbits, as I showed you a few weeks ago. > No exact numbers Naturally! Why should you actually perform body counts to see if you're consumption matches your bloviated rhetoric. > for you, just logic. There's no numbers and no logic, either. |
> >>Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. > > > > Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. > > What wife, you dingbat? I have a girlfriend. She's not going anywhere. Oh, it must have been one of the other trolls. You're so easy to mix up. > > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep > > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate > > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. > > What reduction? How many fewer animals die as a result of your > consumption now than did just a month ago? Why a month ago, what's different now? I gave up meat in 1981. Recently I've begun eliminating the last of the dairy in my meals, so if it's that you're talking about, I haven't kept records and can't therefore answer you. > >>>My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > >>>foremost for health reasons. > >> > >>Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad > >>generalizations you picked up from activists. Says who? You? You who doesn't know me? > > I've been researching much longer than any activist > > websites have been around, in fact, before there > > was a web. > > You're either a liar or you've nothing to show for all this supposed > "research." Nothing to show YOU. > > I've caused a reduction of cds, > > Are you keeping score other than trying to bullshit that "I don't eat > meat, therefore no animal (or fewer animals) died in the production of > my meals"? No. You're bluffing. You can fool yourself (and oviously > you're quite good at it), but you're not fooling anyone else. Yeah, but it's a fact. Vegan foods use way less crops. Therefore less cds. Duh. I don't need to know the exact count, although it would be nice to have. > > On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing > > chemicals that turn their insides to mush. > > Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few > details I can pass along to show otherwise: The chemicals you referred to above, the ones turning their guts to mush, aren't organic. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
usual suspect adding on in response to Skunky:
>> On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing >> chemicals that turn their insides to mush. > > Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few > details I can pass along to show otherwise: > > Organic pesticides cause cancer in rodents (and humans): > One of organic farming's most widely used > pesticides--pyrethrum--has been classified as a ``likely human > carcinogen.'' An advisory committee to the Environmental > Protection Agency made the classification two years ago, after > pyrethrum caused higher-than-normal numbers of tumors in two > different sets of laboratory rodents. > http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articl...1/jun_8_01.htm > > Organic pesticides induce Parkinson's Disease-like symptoms in rodents > (and humans): > Rotenone, a commonly used organic pesticide, has attracted a lot > of attention in Dr. Greenamyre's lab. In past studies, Dr. > Greenamyre and colleagues found that rotenone can induce major > features of PD in rats, including slowness, stiffness and > tremor. Published in Nature Neuroscience in November 2000, these > results support the idea that chronic exposure to environmental > pesticides may contribute to the incidence of Parkinson's > disease in humans. With the new funding, Dr. Greenamyre will > continue to research rodent and cell models of PD to determine > which genes cause susceptibility or resistance to the > PD-inducing effects of pesticides. > http://www.scienceblog.com/community.../20022444.html > > Organic pesticides affect more than just target species: > Some organic pesticides may be toxic to nontargets. > http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/public...are/which.html > > Organic pesticides are as toxic as their synthetic counterparts, and > many of them are banned under the Rotterdam Convention: > The Convention has already been signed by 73 countries – > including Brazil – and ratified by 18. It will come into effect > once there are 50 signatory countries.The original products list > included 22 organic pesticides considered to be highly toxic... > http://www.nex.org.br/english/denuci...enenamento.htm > > Finally, but not because I'm out of ammo on the subject, an organic > pesticide called Dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane is banned because of > its pervasive toxicity. You probably have heard of it by its initials: DDT. > http://www.epa.gov/history/publications/formative6.htm Here's more. Organic pesticides kill fish: While some organic pesticides may be nontoxic or are only slightly toxic to people, they may be very toxic to other animals. For instance, the organic pesticide ryania is very toxic to fish. http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/HGIC2756.htm Organic pesticides kill a variety of non-target species, and foods grown organically are not labeled "pesticide free": Organic pesticides are used widely. Some are toxic. Rotenone kills fish. Copper sulphate kills many creatures. In California, an organic pesticide, sulphur, represents one-third of all pesticide use. For obvious reasons, organic farmers don’t call their produce "pesticide free." http://www.ontariocorn.org/ocpmag/pestruth.html See also: http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuse...etails&id=1677 Copper sulphate is more harmful to a variety of species than its conventional counterpart: Leake candidly criticized organic farmers for using nasty but "natural" pesticides. "The use of copper and sulphur fungicide sprays seems inconsistent with the claim that organic agriculture is pesticide-free. On examination, the eco-toxicology of copper sulphate is undoubtedly more harmful and persistent than its conventional counterpart, Mancozeb." Leake even provided a handy table, showing that the copper sulphate used by organic farmers is toxic to humans, very toxic to earthworms and fish, moderately toxic to birds and harmful to small mammals. http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articl...0/sep_8_00.htm Effects of copper sulphate -- an organic pesticide/fungicide -- on a variety of species including humans: There have been reports of human suicide resulting from the ingestion of gram quantities of this material.... Copper sulfate is very toxic to fish.... Copper sulfate is toxic to aquatic invertebrates, such as crab, shrimp and oysters. Based on data on the potential hazards posed by this material to the slackwater darter, freshwater mussels, and Solano grass, and in an effort to minimize exposure of endangered species to this material, applicators in some counties are required to consult EPA endangered species bulletins before applying copper sulfate. http://tinyurl.com/5y4hm Organic pesticides ARE toxins: Organic pesticide - not an oxymoron, because many organic farmers use pesticides. A pesticide is any compound that kills pests. So Rotenone is considered an organic pesticide even though it does a fantastic job of killing pests and has questionable safety. Rotenone is derived from the roots of various South American legumes. It is a nerve poison that paralyzes insects. Other organic pesticides include copper compounds that can be tough on other organisms and the environment. Pyrethrins are pesticides derived from the pyrethrum daisies. They are a nerve poison that is effective on a wide range of insects. Pyrethrins are moderately toxic to mammals and highly toxic to fish. It is illegal to apply them around ponds or waterways. So even though it says "organic", it can still pack a nasty punch. http://www.springledgefarm.com/glossary.htm How much more evidence do you need, Skunky, before you stop making wild claims about the superiority of organic farming techniques with respect to concern for human health, wildlife safety, etc.? You jelly-headed, clueless urbanite. |
Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>Not for lewd behavior, but for being an eyesore. >>> >>>Such a nice guy! No wonder your wife is leaving you. >> >>What wife, you dingbat? I have a girlfriend. She's not going anywhere. > > Oh, it must have been one of the other trolls. There are no trolls operating in these groups at the present time. > You're so easy to mix up. Perhaps you should lay off the weed so your attention span and cognitive abilities will improve. >>>In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >>>bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >>>all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >> >>What reduction? How many fewer animals die as a result of your >>consumption now than did just a month ago? > > Why a month ago, what's different now? That's when you declared yourself a vegan wannabe. > I gave up > meat in 1981. Recently I've begun eliminating the > last of the dairy in my meals, so if it's that you're > talking about, I haven't kept records and can't > therefore answer you. IOW, you've no way to validate how many animals you're killing or how many you're no longer killing. You're just winging it and making yourself feel better through (wholly false) positive affirmations that you're not causing as much harm to animals as other people. How sanctimonious of you. >>>>>My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and >>>>>foremost for health reasons. >>>> >>>>Liar. You know nothing about sound nutritional principles, only bad >>>>generalizations you picked up from activists. > > Says who? You? You who doesn't know me? I know what you've posted here. You're ignorant about matters of nutrition. >>>I've been researching much longer than any activist >>>websites have been around, in fact, before there >>>was a web. >> >>You're either a liar or you've nothing to show for all this supposed >>"research." > > Nothing to show YOU. Nothing to show ANYONE. Your previous posts on the issues of inhaling toxic smoke, omega-6 intake, and your false generalizations about meat versus no meat demonstrate your ignorance. >>>I've caused a reduction of cds, >> >>Are you keeping score other than trying to bullshit that "I don't eat >>meat, therefore no animal (or fewer animals) died in the production of >>my meals"? No. You're bluffing. You can fool yourself (and oviously >>you're quite good at it), but you're not fooling anyone else. > > > Yeah, but it's NOT > a fact. Then maybe you can come up with some proof that it's a fact? No? I didn't think so. > Vegan foods use way less crops. No, they do not. I demonstrated that your favorite foods like fake sausage require tremendous inputs for their yields -- greater even than the inflated ratios you claimed for meat production. Additionally, you've suggested organic farming would minimize harm to animals; the problem is agricultural experts point out the reduced yields from organic farming require substantially more land be farmed to feed a given number of people. http://www.highyieldconservation.org...c_farming.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org...esticides.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org...abundance.html > Therefore less cds. Duh. I don't need to know the exact > count, although it would be nice to have. It would show you to be in error. >>>On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing >>>chemicals that turn their insides to mush. >> >>Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few >>details I can pass along to show otherwise: > > The chemicals you referred to above, the ones turning their guts to > mush, aren't organic. Oh yes, they are. Click on the links and learn something for a change, Little Miss Health Researcher. RESTORE AND ADD INFO FROM NEW THREAD > Organic pesticides cause cancer in rodents (and humans): > One of organic farming's most widely used > pesticides--pyrethrum--has been classified as a ``likely human > carcinogen.'' An advisory committee to the Environmental > Protection Agency made the classification two years ago, after > pyrethrum caused higher-than-normal numbers of tumors in two > different sets of laboratory rodents. > http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articl...1/jun_8_01.htm > > Organic pesticides induce Parkinson's Disease-like symptoms in rodents (and humans): > Rotenone, a commonly used organic pesticide, has attracted a lot > of attention in Dr. Greenamyre's lab. In past studies, Dr. > Greenamyre and colleagues found that rotenone can induce major > features of PD in rats, including slowness, stiffness and > tremor. Published in Nature Neuroscience in November 2000, these > results support the idea that chronic exposure to environmental > pesticides may contribute to the incidence of Parkinson's > disease in humans. With the new funding, Dr. Greenamyre will > continue to research rodent and cell models of PD to determine > which genes cause susceptibility or resistance to the > PD-inducing effects of pesticides. > http://www.scienceblog.com/community.../20022444.html > > Organic pesticides affect more than just target species: > Some organic pesticides may be toxic to nontargets. > http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/public...are/which.html > > Organic pesticides are as toxic as their synthetic counterparts, and many of them are banned under the Rotterdam Convention: > The Convention has already been signed by 73 countries – > including Brazil – and ratified by 18. It will come into effect > once there are 50 signatory countries.The original products list > included 22 organic pesticides considered to be highly toxic... > http://www.nex.org.br/english/denuci...enenamento.htm > > Finally, but not because I'm out of ammo on the subject, an organic pesticide called Dichlorodiphenyl trichloroethane is banned because of its pervasive toxicity. You probably have heard of it by its initials: DDT. > http://www.epa.gov/history/publications/formative6.htm Here's more. Organic pesticides kill fish: While some organic pesticides may be nontoxic or are only slightly toxic to people, they may be very toxic to other animals. For instance, the organic pesticide ryania is very toxic to fish. http://hgic.clemson.edu/factsheets/HGIC2756.htm Organic pesticides kill a variety of non-target species, and foods grown organically are not labeled "pesticide free": Organic pesticides are used widely. Some are toxic. Rotenone kills fish. Copper sulphate kills many creatures. In California, an organic pesticide, sulphur, represents one-third of all pesticide use. For obvious reasons, organic farmers don’t call their produce "pesticide free." http://www.ontariocorn.org/ocpmag/pestruth.html See also: http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuse...etails&id=1677 Copper sulphate is more harmful to a variety of species than its conventional counterpart: Leake candidly criticized organic farmers for using nasty but "natural" pesticides. "The use of copper and sulphur fungicide sprays seems inconsistent with the claim that organic agriculture is pesticide-free. On examination, the eco-toxicology of copper sulphate is undoubtedly more harmful and persistent than its conventional counterpart, Mancozeb." Leake even provided a handy table, showing that the copper sulphate used by organic farmers is toxic to humans, very toxic to earthworms and fish, moderately toxic to birds and harmful to small mammals. http://www.cgfi.org/materials/articl...0/sep_8_00.htm Effects of copper sulphate -- an organic pesticide/fungicide -- on a variety of species including humans: There have been reports of human suicide resulting from the ingestion of gram quantities of this material.... Copper sulfate is very toxic to fish.... Copper sulfate is toxic to aquatic invertebrates, such as crab, shrimp and oysters. Based on data on the potential hazards posed by this material to the slackwater darter, freshwater mussels, and Solano grass, and in an effort to minimize exposure of endangered species to this material, applicators in some counties are required to consult EPA endangered species bulletins before applying copper sulfate. http://tinyurl.com/5y4hm Organic pesticides ARE toxins: Organic pesticide - not an oxymoron, because many organic farmers use pesticides. A pesticide is any compound that kills pests. So Rotenone is considered an organic pesticide even though it does a fantastic job of killing pests and has questionable safety. Rotenone is derived from the roots of various South American legumes. It is a nerve poison that paralyzes insects. Other organic pesticides include copper compounds that can be tough on other organisms and the environment. Pyrethrins are pesticides derived from the pyrethrum daisies. They are a nerve poison that is effective on a wide range of insects. Pyrethrins are moderately toxic to mammals and highly toxic to fish. It is illegal to apply them around ponds or waterways. So even though it says "organic", it can still pack a nasty punch. http://www.springledgefarm.com/glossary.htm How much more evidence do you need, Skunky, before you stop making wild claims about the superiority of organic farming techniques with respect to concern for human health, wildlife safety, etc.? You jelly-headed, clueless urbanite. |
> >> On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing
> >> chemicals that turn their insides to mush. > > > > Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few > > details I can pass along to show otherwise: The one's that turn their insides to mush are blood thinners. Coumarin and others. These are not organic. As for the other products you mentioned, I make my own organic bug spray and have never needed the following you mentioned. > How much more evidence do you need, Skunky, before you stop making wild > claims about the superiority of organic farming techniques with respect > to concern for human health, wildlife safety, etc.? You jelly-headed, > clueless urbanite. There's still the fact that vegan foods as a whole cause less cds than animal products as a whole. That's something you can't dispute. Organic or not. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
> >> On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing
> >> chemicals that turn their insides to mush. > > > > Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few > > details I can pass along to show otherwise: The one's that turn their insides to mush are blood thinners. Coumarin and others. These are not organic. As for the other products you mentioned, I make my own organic bug spray and have never needed the following you mentioned. > How much more evidence do you need, Skunky, before you stop making wild > claims about the superiority of organic farming techniques with respect > to concern for human health, wildlife safety, etc.? You jelly-headed, > clueless urbanite. There's still the fact that vegan foods as a whole cause less cds than animal products as a whole. That's something you can't dispute. Organic or not. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Ok, you're cut off for a while. You're nothing but
an insult spewer. You couldn't understand my concepts even if you really tried. That makes for repetition on my part and is boring. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Ok, you're cut off for a while. You're nothing but
an insult spewer. You couldn't understand my concepts even if you really tried. That makes for repetition on my part and is boring. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
Scented Nectar wrote: > Ok, you're cut off for a while. You're nothing but > an insult spewer. You couldn't understand my > concepts even if you really tried. That makes > for repetition on my part and is boring. > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. He also has you backed into a corner. You have NO "concepts," only guesses. Like most "vegans," you're a fraud. |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international, >> > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans >> > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? >> =========================== >> If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is > that you >> don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point > of >> acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you > use >> imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Why do you call it MY > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > cd expectations of us. ==================== Because *you* are the one that keeps making claims that *you* cannot back-up, killer. Show us the results of your extensive research, hypocite, and put the matter to restforever. > >> > You certainly have some overly high expectations of >> > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's >> > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous >> > expectations. >> ==================== >> LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of > spewing >> that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the > simple >> rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. > Obviously you >> care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death > and >> suffering. > > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > foremost for health reasons. ========================== Then you're wrong again. But that's not news, is it? I know that I've also happened > to reduce cds in my dietary change and that makes me > happy too. ====================== The same unfounded claim that you cannot, and never will back-up with any data. Stop demanding that vegans eliminate ALL > cds everywhere. ================== LOL I'm only suggesting that you at least live up to *SOME* of the so-called beliefs you spew, killer. As it is, all you manage to prove is that you care nothing about killing animals willy-nilly for nothing more than your selfishness and entertainment. That's impossible in todays world. > I'm content with the dent I've made. Don't demand that > it be bigger. It's not up to you. ================= LOL I never claimed it was, fool. You made the claim that it mattered! You are the one lacking the real results from your so-called beliefs. Instead, all you follow is your simple rule for your simple mind. > >> > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents >> > is a well known fact. >> ====================== >> Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their > nests >> while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that > compassionate, >> killer? > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. ================ BS, liar. Back up your ignorance, fool! Besides, your food comes from the massive factory-farms you keep talking about, killer. > >> > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's >> > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. >> ==================== >> You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research > you've >> claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to > depending >> on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big >> industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra > killing >> you propose, hypocrite? > > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. ================== All grown with inputs from the petro-chemical industry. How much do you get paid, ahill? > >> >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do >> >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. >> >> >> ======================= >> >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that >> >> > proclaims >> >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and > then >> >> > m,akes no >> >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an >> >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. >> >> > >> >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, >> >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe >> >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, >> >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. >> >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. >> >> =============== >> >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' >> > sites, >> >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... >> > >> > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the >> > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even >> > though it's a good one. >> ================ >> Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > stuff there. I'm sure some sites are 'activist'. Some are > religious, some promote health reasons, some just want > to share their recipes. Doesn't matter. It's the recipes > I read and list. ================== And continue to prove the irony and hypocrisy of mainyaining the site to begin with. I love you ignorance, it's so total. > >> >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their >> >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps >> >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer >> >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand >> >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers >> >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. >> >> >> ================== >> >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you > killer? >> >> > >> >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any >> >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? >> >> ================== >> >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted >> > now, and >> >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. >> > >> > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed >> > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. >> ================== >> Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve > their >> impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you > want >> to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the > world,' >> fool? > > Why not talk about the masses? ================== Because it's *YOU* that claims to want to make a difference. You can't bring yourself to actually care enough to make the change, so you focus instead on what you think others are doing and what they should do. That doesn't really leave you off the hook like you think, hypocrite. The reality is that > the masses affect the world around us. What are > the apples and oranges you're talking about? If > ALL individuals took your advise, demand would > exceed supply big time. ================== No, it wouldn't fool. It's the reverse that is true for *your* advice. Like I have told you, *all* beef cattle are already grass-fed for most of their lives. Tha=ey are already on pasture that is alreasdy in place. Man, you really are one willfully ignorant loon, killer. > > > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> > So, if the transportation industry, both national and international, >> > causes animal deaths, then are you suggesting that vegans >> > give up their clothing, tvs, mattresses, stoves, etc.? >> =========================== >> If you truly believed in what you spew, then yes. Your problem is > that you >> don't even try to reduce your impact. In fact, you have made a point > of >> acknowledging the fact that you go out of your way to ensure that you > use >> imported products. Quite compassionate of you, eh hypocrite? > > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Why do you call it MY > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > cd expectations of us. ==================== Because *you* are the one that keeps making claims that *you* cannot back-up, killer. Show us the results of your extensive research, hypocite, and put the matter to restforever. > >> > You certainly have some overly high expectations of >> > what you think vegans should do. It's funny that it's >> > the non-vegan, insulting trolls that have ridiculous >> > expectations. >> ==================== >> LOL They aren't *my* expectations fool. They are your own words of > spewing >> that *YOU* care about animals when all you really do is follow the > simple >> rule for your simple mind that your religion demands of you. > Obviously you >> care nothing about your own contributions to unnecessary animal death > and >> suffering. > > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > foremost for health reasons. ========================== Then you're wrong again. But that's not news, is it? I know that I've also happened > to reduce cds in my dietary change and that makes me > happy too. ====================== The same unfounded claim that you cannot, and never will back-up with any data. Stop demanding that vegans eliminate ALL > cds everywhere. ================== LOL I'm only suggesting that you at least live up to *SOME* of the so-called beliefs you spew, killer. As it is, all you manage to prove is that you care nothing about killing animals willy-nilly for nothing more than your selfishness and entertainment. That's impossible in todays world. > I'm content with the dent I've made. Don't demand that > it be bigger. It's not up to you. ================= LOL I never claimed it was, fool. You made the claim that it mattered! You are the one lacking the real results from your so-called beliefs. Instead, all you follow is your simple rule for your simple mind. > >> > No, an owl is a hoot. Food storage by rodents >> > is a well known fact. >> ====================== >> Yeah fool, they take the poisons they are deliberate fed back to their > nests >> while their guts turn to mush over a few days. How is that > compassionate, >> killer? > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. ================ BS, liar. Back up your ignorance, fool! Besides, your food comes from the massive factory-farms you keep talking about, killer. > >> > Nonsense. There are b12 supplements if one's >> > intestinal flora aren't producing and absorbing it. >> ==================== >> You don't absorb your own b12, fool. So much for all the research > you've >> claimed to have done. And then there is the suppliments. Back to > depending >> on the petro-chemical industry again, I see. Are you a shill for big >> industry? How much of a cut do you get for promoting all this extra > killing >> you propose, hypocrite? > > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. ================== All grown with inputs from the petro-chemical industry. How much do you get paid, ahill? > >> >> >> > That's funny, I've been to very few 'activist' websites. I do >> >> >> > however go to and subscribe to, many science news sites. >> >> >> ======================= >> >> >> LOL Then why are they on your site with links? Anything that >> >> > proclaims >> >> >> that something is the greatest thing since sliced bread, and > then >> >> > m,akes no >> >> >> mention of the fact hat there are differing opinions is an >> >> >> activist/propagand site looking to scam the rubes. >> >> > >> >> > On my recipe link site, I state clearly that all views, beliefs, >> >> > etc are those of the people who made the various recipe >> >> > sites. You will find activists, health nuts, food enthusiasts, >> >> > specialty food sites, etc. I go to those websites for recipes. >> >> > That's where my focus is. For scientific info, I go elsewhere. >> >> =============== >> >> Then you lied above, huh? You claimed you didn't go to 'activist' >> > sites, >> >> yet you link them from you page. What an ignorant dolt... >> > >> > I have been the activist's recipe sites. I go for the >> > recipes. I don't hang around to join a cause, even >> > though it's a good one. >> ================ >> Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > stuff there. I'm sure some sites are 'activist'. Some are > religious, some promote health reasons, some just want > to share their recipes. Doesn't matter. It's the recipes > I read and list. ================== And continue to prove the irony and hypocrisy of mainyaining the site to begin with. I love you ignorance, it's so total. > >> >> >> > By admitting that hunting the deer would reverse their >> >> >> > overpopulation, you admit that hunting them keeps >> >> >> > lowering their amounts. After they are no longer >> >> >> > overpopulated, when you keep hunting (the demand >> >> >> > for meat doesn't go away you know) their numbers >> >> >> > keep going down until they are extinct. >> >> >> ================== >> >> >> Clueless urbanite. You have no clue as to animals, do you > killer? >> >> > >> >> > Try reading my paragraph again. Did you take any >> >> > rudimentary mathematics when you were a kid? >> >> ================== >> >> Math has nothing to do with animal numbers fool. Deer are hunted >> > now, and >> >> guess what? Their numbers continue to rise, fool. >> > >> > Try increasing the hunt to replace all factory farmed >> > meat. You'll see extinction soon enough. >> ================== >> Why? We are talking about what an individual could do to improve > their >> impact on animals and the environment, not the masses. Why is it you > want >> to compare apples and oranges when it comes to what can 'feed the > world,' >> fool? > > Why not talk about the masses? ================== Because it's *YOU* that claims to want to make a difference. You can't bring yourself to actually care enough to make the change, so you focus instead on what you think others are doing and what they should do. That doesn't really leave you off the hook like you think, hypocrite. The reality is that > the masses affect the world around us. What are > the apples and oranges you're talking about? If > ALL individuals took your advise, demand would > exceed supply big time. ================== No, it wouldn't fool. It's the reverse that is true for *your* advice. Like I have told you, *all* beef cattle are already grass-fed for most of their lives. Tha=ey are already on pasture that is alreasdy in place. Man, you really are one willfully ignorant loon, killer. > > > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >> > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >> > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >> > >> >> Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have >> you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that >> number? > > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. ==================== Ly. The > larger the crop use, the more cds there are. ================= LOL You just proved you cause more fool, because that's *ALL* you eat now. Massive amounts of mono-culture, factory-farmed crops, courtesy of the petro-chemical industy. You really are just too stupid for this, killer. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. ================== ROTFLMAO What? It just all falls like manna from heaven? You are seriously insane, killer. No exact numbers for > you, just logic. ============== Illogic. You have no numbers, and you have no logic. > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > Irony, hypocrisy, stupidty and ignorance all rolled up in one giant mass. > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> > In answer to trolls questions, I discuss cds. You keep >> > bringing it up. I never claimed to be able to eliminate >> > all cds, but a reduction is fine by me. >> > >> >> Hang on. How do you know you're "reducing?" By how many deaths have >> you reduced in the last ten years, and how did you arrive at that >> number? > > > Let's see. A long time ago, I ate meat. For each > pound of meat, it took a huge,huge amount of > crops just to make one pound of meat. ==================== Ly. The > larger the crop use, the more cds there are. ================= LOL You just proved you cause more fool, because that's *ALL* you eat now. Massive amounts of mono-culture, factory-farmed crops, courtesy of the petro-chemical industy. You really are just too stupid for this, killer. > Now that I've eliminated meat from my diet, > I'm left with products that are lower cd, since > it DOESN'T take a huge amount of crops to > raise vegan food. ================== ROTFLMAO What? It just all falls like manna from heaven? You are seriously insane, killer. No exact numbers for > you, just logic. ============== Illogic. You have no numbers, and you have no logic. > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > Irony, hypocrisy, stupidty and ignorance all rolled up in one giant mass. > |
Scented Nectar wrote: <snip> > There's still the fact that vegan foods as a whole > cause less cds than animal products as a whole. > That's something you can't dispute. Organic or > not. I'm disputing it. It's your assertion; prove it. |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... > Ok, you're cut off for a while. You're nothing but > an insult spewer. You couldn't understand my > concepts even if you really tried. That makes > for repetition on my part and is boring. ================== ROTFLMAO In other words, you can't take the real data he provides, so you snip it and run away. Typical vegan loon. Here, I'll help you out, why not respond to what he posted: Your ignorant spew....> Vegan foods use way less crops. Usuals response, which you have to run from, killler... "No, they do not. I demonstrated that your favorite foods like fake sausage require tremendous inputs for their yields -- greater even than the inflated ratios you claimed for meat production. Additionally, you've suggested organic farming would minimize harm to animals; the problem is agricultural experts point out the reduced yields from organic farming require substantially more land be farmed to feed a given number of people. http://www.highyieldconservation.org...c_farming.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org...esticides.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org/articles/scarcity_abundance.html" > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... > Ok, you're cut off for a while. You're nothing but > an insult spewer. You couldn't understand my > concepts even if you really tried. That makes > for repetition on my part and is boring. ================== ROTFLMAO In other words, you can't take the real data he provides, so you snip it and run away. Typical vegan loon. Here, I'll help you out, why not respond to what he posted: Your ignorant spew....> Vegan foods use way less crops. Usuals response, which you have to run from, killler... "No, they do not. I demonstrated that your favorite foods like fake sausage require tremendous inputs for their yields -- greater even than the inflated ratios you claimed for meat production. Additionally, you've suggested organic farming would minimize harm to animals; the problem is agricultural experts point out the reduced yields from organic farming require substantially more land be farmed to feed a given number of people. http://www.highyieldconservation.org...c_farming.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org...esticides.html http://www.highyieldconservation.org/articles/scarcity_abundance.html" > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > |
"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ... >> >> On organic farms you won't find the rodent killing >> >> chemicals that turn their insides to mush. >> > >> > Oh, please tell me your source for this information. Here are a few >> > details I can pass along to show otherwise: > > The one's that turn their insides to mush are blood thinners. > Coumarin and others. These are not organic. As for the > other products you mentioned, I make my own organic > bug spray and have never needed the following you > mentioned. > >> How much more evidence do you need, Skunky, before you stop making > wild >> claims about the superiority of organic farming techniques with > respect >> to concern for human health, wildlife safety, etc.? You jelly-headed, >> clueless urbanite. > > There's still the fact that vegan foods as a whole > cause less cds than animal products as a whole. > That's something you can't dispute. Organic or > not. ================= Sure, especially when you add some organic meats to the mix. *Then* you cut way down on the number of CDs you cause. Thanks for finally admiting it fool. That's something *you* cannot refute. Oh, wait, you never provide any evidence to support anything you say, so you never really refute anything, you just ly about it. > > > -- > SN > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. > Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. > > |
> > There's still the fact that vegan foods as a whole
> > cause less cds than animal products as a whole. > > That's something you can't dispute. Organic or > > not. > > I'm disputing it. It's your assertion; prove it. Do you dispute that the animal product industry as a whole uses more crops and thus has more cds than plant foods grown for human consumption as a whole? Animals need way more crops to produce a pound of meat than for a pound of vegan food. Pigs, poultry, you name it, it takes more crops to feed them. Anyways, if you're so concerned about cds, then do something about it. I've done my bit, like it or leave it. -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
> > Well, I for one am not willing to give up all machinery
> > and clothes (I'd get arrested!). Why do you call it MY > > spew, when it's you trolls who keep bringing up your > > cd expectations of us. > ==================== > Because *you* are the one that keeps making claims that *you* cannot > back-up, killer. Show us the results of your extensive research, hypocite, > and put the matter to restforever. Ricky boy, you're babbling. What claims, and which research results? > > My 'simple' rule of not eating animal products is first and > > foremost for health reasons. > ========================== > Then you're wrong again. But that's not news, is it? And I think that you're wrong. Who cares. > I know that I've also happened > > to reduce cds in my dietary change and that makes me > > happy too. > ====================== > The same unfounded claim that you cannot, and never will back-up with any > data. I've repeated it so many times already, I wouldn't be surprised if people kill-filter me just for that alone! :) > Stop demanding that vegans eliminate ALL > > cds everywhere. > ================== > LOL I'm only suggesting that you at least live up to *SOME* of the > so-called beliefs you spew, killer. As it is, all you manage to prove is > that you care nothing about killing animals willy-nilly for nothing more > than your selfishness and entertainment. We'll choose which *SOME*. You don't get to. The rest of what you wrote sounds like babbling. Here's your new name. Ricky the babbling brook. Ain't that nice...:) > > On commercial farms, where most crops go for use as > > fodder, that's true. But on organic farms, that's not true. > ================ > BS, liar. Back up your ignorance, fool! > Besides, your food comes from the massive factory-farms you keep talking > about, killer. I buy organic when I can, but how much is not up to you. Guess what, you don't get to run my life. Go google stuff yourself. I'm not your researcher. > > I'd still rather take the bacterially grown (not petro) b12 supplements. > > I forget the brand name, but I saved the message somewhere. > ================== > All grown with inputs from the petro-chemical industry. How much do you get > paid, ahill? Can you spell paraniod conspiracist kids? > >> ================ > >> Then you did ly? You claimed you didn't go to them. > > > > I said I've been to very few. When I go to recipe sites from > > my listing, I'm there for the recipes. I hardly notice the other > > stuff there. I'm sure some sites are 'activist'. Some are > > religious, some promote health reasons, some just want > > to share their recipes. Doesn't matter. It's the recipes > > I read and list. > ================== > And continue to prove the irony and hypocrisy of mainyaining the site to > begin with. I love you ignorance, it's so total. What's wrong with maintaining the site? It's a very useful resource for all styles of vegetarian. What on earth could you have against it? -- SN http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/ A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites. Has a fun 'Jump to a Random Link' button. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FoodBanter