User Controls
We have a moral obligation to stop eating meat
-
2018-03-06 at 6:23 AM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock the entirety of your height statement is irrelevant to the fact that it has been scientifically proven that higher 'quality' diets within a population result in that populations increasing height/mass, over time.
half true.
while ''high quality diet'' does assist people to grow up to their maximum potential .....
still theres a limit to that maximum potential and that limit is different between different races of men.
is average height between american raised white, yellow and black the same ???
i dont think so.the entirety of your olympics statement is irrelevant to the fact that the countries that win the most medals have the highest 'quality' diets.
your confusing correlation for causation.
people who get to eat ''quality diet'' came from families that have disposable income to waste on sports, they also live in societies that do have excess budget to waste on building sports-related facilities,
but most importantly .... they live under a government with a lot of budget surpluses to waste on training and sending people to international sporting events to make their country look good.
the only few exception to this rule were the communists. both china and what was once soviet union spent more than what they can really afford to make themselves look good.
and dont forget the fact that it was only after the 3rd reich had became economically successful that they managed to host and won the glorious olympics.
its governments resolves that win olympic medals, not diet. i dont think any point in time the icelandicks had lesser quality diet than the soviets.malnourished individuals do not become more muscular or taller (overall) than a similar population. the niggers that enter international competitions are well nourished and trained as soon as they are identified as being potential candidates.
im not disputing that malnourishment make people skinnier and shorter .... what i was saying was that the same amount of nourishment value have different effects on people of different races.
and i wasnt talking about international nigger sportsman. was talking about those people that live in rwanda and somalia and haiti.the judenkikes and their shills are engaged in a systemic pogrom to reduce the population of the planet. fact based on irrefutable evidence. indisputable.
if thats true then Bill Krozby seems to be immune to it.
you know what this means ... rite ???
Bill Krozby IS SUPERIOR. -
2018-03-06 at 7:05 AM UTCwell Bill Krozby is certainly superior to jill the fuckin jedi jar.
. -
2018-03-06 at 12:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Sorry, I'll try to use smaller words to help you understand next time.
OK, so you think genetic engineering is categorically bad. Would you like to make the case here, or are you just planning to shout it loudly and repeatedly?
Except like 40 years of genetic engineering and extensive testing which goes into any GM product.
Yeah, except that soy protein isolate has a bout 3 times as much protein by weight than lean beef. Also a higher protein to calorie ratio too.
Lol, you are one cringe ass bitch
MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING -
2018-03-06 at 12:33 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Yeah, pretty much this.
What do you think "pseudointellectual" means?
You are the embodiment of the word. Your try hard approach to intellectual matters with a handful of degenerate users to elevate your status in this pathetic collection of humans is the very essence of pseudointellectual behavior. -
2018-03-06 at 1:02 PM UTC
-
2018-03-06 at 2:40 PM UTC
Originally posted by benny vader half true.
while ''high quality diet'' does assist people to grow up to their maximum potential …..
still theres a limit to that maximum potential and that limit is different between different races of men.
is average height between american raised white, yellow and black the same ???
i dont think so.
your confusing correlation for causation.
people who get to eat ''quality diet'' came from families that have disposable income to waste on sports, they also live in societies that do have excess budget to waste on building sports-related facilities,
but most importantly …. they live under a government with a lot of budget surpluses to waste on training and sending people to international sporting events to make their country look good.
the only few exception to this rule were the communists. both china and what was once soviet union spent more than what they can really afford to make themselves look good.
and dont forget the fact that it was only after the 3rd reich had became economically successful that they managed to host and won the glorious olympics.
its governments resolves that win olympic medals, not diet. i dont think any point in time the icelandicks had lesser quality diet than the soviets.
im not disputing that malnourishment make people skinnier and shorter …. what i was saying was that the same amount of nourishment value have different effects on people of different races.
and i wasnt talking about international nigger sportsman. was talking about those people that live in rwanda and somalia and haiti.
if thats true then Bill Krozby seems to be immune to it.
you know what this means … rite ???
Bill Krozby IS SUPERIOR.
that gibbering is irrelevant and your observational skills are Bill Krozby-tier tarded. im not talking about different subspecies...im saying that if a population is fed an improved diet over what they were previously their size will increase. you might as well quit arguing that since its been scientifically proven in several papers.
youre confusing causation for correlation. i didnt say anything about specific, localized focus on well-nourished individuals. i said the whole population.
who gives a fuck about niggers...youre the one that brought them up in the first place. it doesnt change the accuracy of my statement
Bill Krozby is immune to it because he is exactly what theyre trying to create: a drug-addicted, sub-bottomfag, homosexual, inept, retarded, high-estrogen, zero-motivation, handsome and well tanned individual -
2018-03-06 at 2:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny Fine, can you show that this characterizes soy crops today?
Yeah, like a decade of development and testing for an individual crop bro. 40 years is how long we've been creating GM organisms for.
Shifting goalposts. The question has never been "is soy nutritionally superior to meat". You started this by claiming you can't have a nutritionally sufficient diet without animal products. You were wrong, now you're trying to argue something else.
The fact remains that you can satisfy your protein requirements with soy better than any historical omnivore ever could.
Yeah bro, I'm definitely going to get cannibalized because I don't eat meat. That makes so much sense. You weak little bitch.
right after you show there is zero possibility of GM crops causing a catastrophic environmental disaster
irrelevant. every individual example of a specific genetic sequence is unique
the only shifting goalposts around here are the ones embedded in your asshole and the only fact is that soy is an inferior protein source to animal protein.
laugh it up, fuzzball. see how funny it is when you find yourself tied to a spit, rotating over an open fire with a nice juicy apple crammed into your craw. bone-apatite herbivore. -
2018-03-06 at 2:49 PM UTCNumbers are building rapidly for the Anti-Lanny Army. We shall amass legions.
*rubs hands together slowly* -
2018-03-06 at 2:52 PM UTC
-
2018-03-06 at 2:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker MORALLY SUPERIOR BEING
bitch
Originally posted by Fox Paws You would know this if you spent 3.5 seconds on google.
“Describing a person who pretends to be of greater intelligence than he or she in fact is.”
OK, so how exactly am I "pretending to be of greater intelligence" than I am? What level of intelligence have I claimed to have? What level of intelligence do I actually have?
Originally posted by infinityshock right after you show there is zero possibility of GM crops causing a catastrophic environmental disaster
lol, no. You're the one who made the claim that soy is "shit protein" because it's GM. The onus is on you to prove anything like "catastrophic environmental disaster", not on me to prove the opposite.irrelevant. every individual example of a specific genetic sequence is unique
Well again, over a decade of testing so uhh, you know, get rekt.the only shifting goalposts around here are the ones embedded in your asshole and the only fact is that soy is an inferior protein source to animal protein.
laugh it up, fuzzball. see how funny it is when you find yourself tied to a spit, rotating over an open fire with a nice juicy apple crammed into your craw. bone-apatite herbivore.
-
2018-03-06 at 3:01 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny bitch
OK, so how exactly am I "pretending to be of greater intelligence" than I am? What level of intelligence have I claimed to have? What level of intelligence do I actually have?
lol, no. You're the one who made the claim that soy is "shit protein" because it's GM. The onus is on you to prove anything like "catastrophic environmental disaster", not on me to prove the opposite.
Well again, over a decade of testing so uhh, you know, get rekt.
you fucking illiterate retard. i said soy is shit protein because it is inferior to animal protein as a part of human dietary requirements. the GM is icing on the cake in making it a potential biological toxin and reason enough not to consume it.
you fucking illiterate retard. you literally have no idea what youre typing. i said every individual example of a specific genetic sequence is unique which means there is no 'decade' of testing done. go read up on monsanto and their practices. they had one experiment on roundup-proof corn or some shit that as soon as the genome modification became viable (for every successful result there are hundreds of failures) they went outside and literally planted it in the ground where a stray gust of wind could have resulted in its chimera DNA being released to create future generations of unknown plantlife. there is a lawsuit about farmers surrounding montsanto land bringing lawsuits against them.
take it in the ass, bottomfag. -
2018-03-06 at 3:15 PM UTC
Originally posted by Lanny OK, so how exactly am I "pretending to be of greater intelligence" than I am? What level of intelligence have I claimed to have? What level of intelligence do I actually have?
Doesn’t work that way. It’s not like there’s an instance where you said “I am very smart” and then later I found proof that you’re actually not smart, like the results of an IQ test you took and it was a 105.
I don’t know how objectively intelligent you really are. But I do know you use big words and convoluted sentence structure to explain something very simple, so that your position appears to be more academic/credible, even though often times your arguments and the line of thinking behind them are fucking retarded.
You’re just good at twisting people’s words around to make it sound like they’re wrong in order to “win” a debate. Like the example I mentioned earlier where someone was talking about GMO’s and you brought up the fact that selective breeding has been around since ancient times when you knew nobody was talking about that.
You remind me of a liberal version of Tucker Carlson, in fact whenever I see you post I usually imagine you sitting behind your keyboard like this:
-
2018-03-06 at 3:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by Fox Paws Like the example I mentioned earlier where someone was talking about GMO’s and you brought up the fact that selective breeding has been around since ancient times when you knew nobody was talking about that.
that.
either he was intentionally trying to confuse or hes just retarded.
im more inclined to believe he is a victim of the affliction known as liberal-tardness which makes an individual unable to comprehend reality, form coherent thoughts on their own, and makes them susceptible to believing anything their masters tell them to believe.
no one who has half a clue would mistake the process of GM...manipulating the actual genetic makeup on the cellular level of an organism, which is a wholly unnatural act...with the natural practice of hybridization and selective breeding. -
2018-03-06 at 3:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by Fox Paws Doesn’t work that way. It’s not like there’s an instance where you said “I am very smart” and then later I found proof that you’re actually not smart, like the results of an IQ test you took and it was a 105.
I don’t know how objectively intelligent you really are. But I do know you use big words and convoluted sentence structure to explain something very simple, so that your position appears to be more academic/credible, even though often times your arguments and the line of thinking behind them are fucking retarded.
You’re just good at twisting people’s words around to make it sound like they’re wrong in order to “win” a debate. Like the example I mentioned earlier where someone was talking about GMO’s and you brought up the fact that selective breeding has been around since ancient times when you knew nobody was talking about that.
You remind me of a liberal version of Tucker Carlson, in fact whenever I see you post I usually imagine you sitting behind your keyboard like this:
yeah i've noticed that with lanny
. -
2018-03-06 at 3:36 PM UTCSoy protein is very close to animal protein in terms of digestibility, usability, etc. In every measurable way we can determine the value of protein, soy is right up there.
To suggest that it's bad because it's "GM" is retarded, and only an actual retarded person would say so. -
2018-03-06 at 3:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock you fucking illiterate retard. i said soy is shit protein because it is inferior to animal protein as a part of human dietary requirements. the GM is icing on the cake in making it a potential biological toxin and reason enough not to consume it.
wrongsoy is shit protein because of its quality in relation to animal protein. being GM makes it even more so.
If you'd like you change your position by admitting being a GM crop does not make soy a "shit protein" and would like to go back to discussing the nutritional value of soy, we can do that, but I don't think you're going to have any better luck there bud.you fucking illiterate retard. you literally have no idea what youre typing. i said every individual example of a specific genetic sequence is unique which means there is no 'decade' of testing done.
wut? Every human genetic sequence is unique too, that doesn't mean each new person born is a pending ecological disaster. The fact remains that the average time between the start of a GM crop's development and it being farmed is over a decade of development and testing.
Originally posted by Fox Paws Doesn’t work that way. It’s not like there’s an instance where you said “I am very smart” and then later I found proof that you’re actually not smart, like the results of an IQ test you took and it was a 105.
I don’t know how objectively intelligent you really are. But I do know you use big words and convoluted sentence structure to explain something very simple, so that your position appears to be more academic/credible, even though often times your arguments and the line of thinking behind them are fucking retarded.
So what you're saying is that I'm a pseudo-intellectual because because of the way I write and because you think my positions are "fucking retarded". Are you the arbiter or "fucking retardedness"? Do you decide which words are "big" and which sentences are "convoluted"?
You're accusing me pretending to be something but can't point to a single place where I claim to be that thing. Instead you're convinced I'm a "pseudointellectual" because of some gestalt impression that I have no possible way of responding to.You’re just good at twisting people’s words around to make it sound like they’re wrong in order to “win” a debate.
I don't really know what "twisting" I've done here. Infinityshock has repeatedly claimed, though a haze of homoerotic insults, that I've misinterpreted what he said, and in each case I've taken his clarification over what seemed to be a pretty natural interpretation of his previous comment.Like the example I mentioned earlier where someone was talking about GMO’s and you brought up the fact that selective breeding has been around since ancient times when you knew nobody was talking about that.
I never said anyone was talking about selective breeding. The point I was making was that if you want to criticize modern genetic engineering you can't just do it by saying "GM is bad" or "GM is unnatural". You have to pick out some particular issue with it, like say that GM soy was poorly tested (it wasn't). Now I think you actually can do this, I'm certainly not trying to defend Monsanto's business practices, but that's a more nuanced argument to make, especially now that there are viable alternatives to Monsanto's product. -
2018-03-06 at 3:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by Zanick Soy protein is very close to animal protein in terms of digestibility, usability, etc. In every measurable way we can determine the value of protein, soy is right up there.
To suggest that it's bad because it's "GM" is retarded, and only an actual retarded person would say so.
BUT IT TASTES LIKE SHIT FFS
. -
2018-03-06 at 3:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by infinityshock no one who has half a clue would mistake the process of GM…manipulating the actual genetic makeup on the cellular level of an organism, which is a wholly unnatural act…with the natural practice of hybridization and selective breeding.
See that's why it's worth bringing it up. There is no line you can draw that makes one of these practices "natural" and the other "unnatural" nor is the naturalness of a practice any guarantee of ecological safety (we've managed cause plenty of ecological disaster without GMO crops) or the unnaturalness an indictment of a crops viability, nutritional value, or ecological safety. -
2018-03-06 at 3:39 PM UTC
-
2018-03-06 at 3:39 PM UTC
