Going vegan to save the planet

What fruit, veg, or nut do you eat to get eicosapentaenoic acid?

Photosynthetic bacteria ... both humans and fish process this into these nutrients your describing ... at least that's what Wikipedia says ... that's a problem for organic veggies, covered in bug poop and algae ... ewwwwww ...

You must be a Catholic or something ...
 
Photosynthetic bacteria ... both humans and fish process this into these nutrients your describing ... at least that's what Wikipedia says ... that's a problem for organic veggies, covered in bug poop and algae ... ewwwwww ...

You must be a Catholic or something ...
No, there are various acids in meat that vegans can't get. Such acids help inflammation etc.. they have benefits. It's why vegans can all too often suffer from deficiencies due to their diet. Their choice, it's a shame they don't allow others to have a choice too.
 
No, there are various acids in meat that vegans can't get. Such acids help inflammation etc.. they have benefits. It's why vegans can all too often suffer from deficiencies due to their diet. Their choice, it's a shame they don't allow others to have a choice too.

I'm familiar with your argument ... partially why I advocate for reducing meat consumption, satirically by 90% ... but even a 25% reduction in meats is helpful to most people ...

The main benefit of meat is as a complete protein, it has all the essential amino acids humans need ... the vegan will need to mix and match to get that full suite, easily with rice and beans ... and of course eating mammalian meat has all the vitamins and minerals essential to all mammals, if you believe that evolution crap ...

There's a cost ... saturated fatty acids ... cholesterol ... why Atorvastatin is the most commonly prescribed medication in the United States ... vegans completely avoid all that ... it's a choice ...

Don't you wish April was your daughter?:

 
Well you wasted a lot of time there because you ignored my primary message and thought and circumvented it to spin things your way in order to lecture me.
I addressed your primary message from several different directions
Like saying smoking and sex aren't the same thing
The point I made was the the craving for tobacco will stop while the craving for sex will not. That makes them very much not "like" as you asserted.
while spinning me some yarn about you quitting smoking which was irrelevant.
I was establishing that I had experienced smoking and both unsuccessful and successful attempts to quit as well as the desire for sex.
I didn't say sex and smoking was the same thing, I said they require willpower to resist the urge, that's all I said.
One requires willpower for a year or so. The other will tempt you your entire life.
Everything else you invented was just so you could speak to me like you're a highschool kid proud of himself for wowing a bunch of middle schoolers with a pedestrian interpretation of catcher in the rye to get a cheap sense of self satisfaction.
I invented nothing.
Reply if you wish but I won't read it,
Of course not. I showed your contentions were deeply flawed
youve shown me you're incapable of engagement of conversation.
I'm still here, engaging in conversation. You're (apparently) not. That would make you the incapable one.
Maybe it will be different next time we cross paths in another topic.
We'll see.

I showed that your god limits sex by condemning sex out of wedlock. I showed the rules of your god (as you see them) are illogical. If your god limits sex to couples in wedlock solely because married parents are best for children, there should be no restriction on sex purely for pleasure in or out of wedlock because neither will produce offspring. I also noted the obvious point that the authors of the Bible knew of no effective birth control, something an omniscient god should have known was coming along.

Your contention that the behavior of godless and hedonistic people would be limited by your god's rules makes no sense since godless and hedonistic people aren't paying your god any attention. Next you brought up Sodom and Gomorrah to illustrate your god's aversion to godlessness and hedonism. Unfortunately, there were innocent people in Sodom and Gomorrah whom your tales say your god slew out of hand. And then there's the research that demonstrates Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by a meteor strike. I could easily see that the immediate response would be that your god had sent the meteor, but then I have to wonder, why JUST Sodom and Gomorrah? There are godless and hedonistic people all over the planet. At the time when those cities were destroyed, the majority of humans on the planet were NOT Jews and there were no Christians then of course. Why do they all live their lives in peace and it was only the cities that Abraham searched that were utterly destroyed? Were both cities destroyed simply to teach Abraham a lesson?

You tell us that sinning only makes sinning more attractive. Yet the vast majority of humans committing those particular acts had absolutely no idea they were sins. If God created all humans and wanted all of them to worship him, he had to do something so that, at the very least, everyone knew he existed and had lain down some rules with which they needed to familiarize themselves. He did not. Yet the Bible tells us that he frequently punished people that worshipped other gods or no gods or violated rules of his with which they were completely unfamiliar.

We do not find sex extremely pleasurable and desire to have it because god wanted us to procreate. It's because of evolution. It's because it's one of the best guarantors of reproductive success. Species that lack such desires would go extinct in short order. So, it is very deep within our genes and the genes of all life capable of desire.

You state that "all sins are desirable one". But very few murders are a result of desire. Committing murder rarely makes the murderer experience pleasure. Many sins - many of the worst sins, are a result of anger or from the competition for required resources. And please keep in mind the distinction between needs and desires. One you will die without while lacking the other will do no more than make you unhappy. You desire to win this argument but you will not be physically harmed if you fail to do so. Having an accurate grasp of reality, on the other hand, can have a far more serious import to your life.
 
Last edited:
British scientists have found out that human breath is bad for the planet.
Apparently they are preparing society to do something about it...

Communism or Soylent Green!
GXBne6nWAAAoRtE
 
I'm familiar with your argument ... partially why I advocate for reducing meat consumption, satirically by 90% ... but even a 25% reduction in meats is helpful to most people ...

The main benefit of meat is as a complete protein, it has all the essential amino acids humans need ... the vegan will need to mix and match to get that full suite, easily with rice and beans ... and of course eating mammalian meat has all the vitamins and minerals essential to all mammals, if you believe that evolution crap ...

There's a cost ... saturated fatty acids ... cholesterol ... why Atorvastatin is the most commonly prescribed medication in the United States ... vegans completely avoid all that ... it's a choice ...

Don't you wish April was your daughter?:


Do you think vegans think meat eaters just eat meat and nothing else?

I mean, I eat fruit, veg, nuts, seeds, spices, pasta, rice, flour etc.. it's just that many of my meals contain a splash of egg, butter, cheese, meat etc.. I would say my diet would barely hit 25% of meat/dairy, and I'm meat eater.

We were brought up to eat everything in moderation, probably why no one in the family has any allergies.
 
Do you think vegans think meat eaters just eat meat and nothing else?

Why did you quote me? ... I never said such a thing ... unless that is your argument ... please, make up your mind ...

You seem knowledgeable in this matter ... so I'd expect a balanced diet ... most don't care ... for them reducing meat is a good idea ... because yeah people eat meat and nothing else ... why Atorvastatins exist ...
 
Why did you quote me? ... I never said such a thing ... unless that is your argument ... please, make up your mind ...

You seem knowledgeable in this matter ... so I'd expect a balanced diet ... most don't care ... for them reducing meat is a good idea ... because yeah people eat meat and nothing else ... why Atorvastatins exist ...
I was just simply asking a question/statement, a rhetorical question. As you mentioned reducing meat in diets, do you think vegans think meat eaters eat nothing but meat.
 
Vegans!!!!!!!!

How does wiping out forests for food crops and avocados save the planet? How does shipping and flying fruit and veg around the globe save the planet?

:popcorn:

Most of those food crops go to feeding the ANIMALS that you eat, Einstein. Animal agriculture is the primary driver of deforestation, especially beef production.

You keep showing your ignorance with every post.
 
The girlfriend and I use Costa Coffee in the UK, Starbucks is not so good. I used to enjoy the small Lemon Tarts but I stopped buying them a few months ago because the pastry went tasteless and crap, and the Lemon filling wasn't much better. Bells in Lazonby make Costa's products. I asked a guy I know that works there and he said they now use a certain pastry, it's vegan friendly. He did tell me the name given to the pastry but I can't remember, so I will have to ask him again. So even a blind taste test, vegan is shite.

Same with the premade pastry from supermarkets. I thought this is shite, studied the box and yup, suitable for vegans. So I make my own.

I bought a Hoisin Duck wrap, bit into it, stopped, then spat it out. I accidentally picked up and bought vegan crap. Straight into the bin, minging. How you lot eat that shite is beyond belief. By law, a warning message should flag up on the till saying, "WARNING - this product is vegan, do you still want it?". So now, I study everything so I don't waste my money again.

If you want to live off nuts, then stfu and get on with it. You stick to Almonds and vegetable oil, I'll stick to rib eye and butter.

I don't live off nuts, I live off all sorts of real foods. And maybe where you live the food is bad (if you're in England, I know from experience the food is bad over there) but I can honestly say that where I live that's not my experience at all. There's tons and tons of fantastic vegan options these days, so it's just a matter of learning which brands to buy, and it sure sounds like you know nothing about that. But obviously since you're not a vegan, I wouldn't expect you to know that. :dunno:

And for the umpteenth time (I've lost count, it feels like I've said this 30 times) vegans don't eat only that processed "alternative" stuff. You seem to think that's all vegans eat, forgetting that there are something like 30,000 edible plant foods (probably way more than that) so there's no need to eat that processed alternative stuff, and those products are mostly aimed at new vegans to help them transition easier to a totally different way of eating.
 
I was just simply asking a question/statement, a rhetorical question. As you mentioned reducing meat in diets, do you think vegans think meat eaters eat nothing but meat.

I'm not a vegan ... why ask me? ... the answer is yes, folks out there who eat nothing but meat, not vegetables ... strokes, obesity, heart disease ...

Are you ignoring the health problems associated with meat-eating? ...
 
Well you wasted a lot of time there because you ignored my primary message and thought and circumvented it to spin things your way in order to lecture me.

Like saying smoking and sex aren't the same thing while spinning me some yarn about you quitting smoking which was irrelevant. I didn't say sex and smoking was the same thing, I said they require willpower to resist the urge, that's all I said. Everything else you invented was just so you could speak to me like you're a highschool kid proud of himself for wowing a bunch of middle schoolers with a pedestrian interpretation of catcher in the rye to get a cheap sense of self satisfaction.

Reply if you wish but I won't read it, youve shown me you're incapable of engagement of conversation. Maybe it will be different next time we cross paths in another topic
Hey.... Stop picking on Holden Caulfield.... He's got enough problems without being thrown into the global warming mishmash! 😎
 
I'm familiar with your argument ... partially why I advocate for reducing meat consumption, satirically by 90% ... but even a 25% reduction in meats is helpful to most people ...

The main benefit of meat is as a complete protein, it has all the essential amino acids humans need ... the vegan will need to mix and match to get that full suite, easily with rice and beans ... and of course eating mammalian meat has all the vitamins and minerals essential to all mammals, if you believe that evolution crap ...

There's a cost ... saturated fatty acids ... cholesterol ... why Atorvastatin is the most commonly prescribed medication in the United States ... vegans completely avoid all that ... it's a choice ...

Don't you wish April was your daughter?:


People need to change from living to eat to eating to live.
 
Back in the 1970's, the number kicked around was 20 acres of animal food provide the same amount of human food in a single acre of land ... think of all the methane cows belch ... drive by a big feed lot ... if you want to protect the environment, then cut meat consumption by 90% ... or say you hate nature ... there's no grey matter here, either you're with us or against us ... choose wisely ...

For folks dragging some extra weight, maybe a salad every once in a while wouldn't hurt ...
Fuck the planet, let's have a steak.
 
Back
Top Bottom