or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 173598 comments are related to an article called:

Live Election Day Thread

Page 6757 of 6944

posted on 24/1/20

Also, it takes a stunning lack of self-awareness to label a whole community a cult, whilst being in complete denial of the robust evidence which states the opposite.

Obviously, it is a little nuanced in that not all plant foods are 'good' for the environment. But some of the extreme leaps in logic through this conversation, to paint vegans as this illogical ideological mob, is quite frankly laughable.

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 2 hours, 15 minutes ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Hector (U3606)
posted less than a minute ago
Churchill led a coalition government, not belittling his leadership but literally as soon as war was over he was out on his ear.

Every PM has pluses and minuses. However, Theresa May is far and away the worst PM we have ever had and she beat Johnson!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You know he came back in in 51?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Keep England White"

Legend!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Literally defeated the actual Naztis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What?

Like I said, all leaders have plus and minus columns.
Churchill led the country during the war, he was also an Imperialistic racist. No doubting his rhetorical skills though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You must be crazy if you cant weigh his actual accomplishments fighting fascism against a few quotes here and there

Have some sense of perspective when you analyse hiatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, I'm not blinded by Churchills omnipotent brilliance.

Ask the Indians, the Irish, the Anzacs for their perspective.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Proving you have no sense of perspective once again
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, you're obviously blinded by high water mark war years, that's fair enough.

I love reading history, he led and incredible life from his 'shooting savages' in the Sudan to wanting to gas the kurds, his rejoicing in Boer and Kenyan concentration camps, his introduction of the black and tans, his major part in the Indian famine etc and all his many, many racist remarks that even his friends and colleagues recoiled from.

For the 3rd time, pluses and minuses, you are either willing to overlook his nastiness because he led a coalition government in the war or you take his entire life into acount and have a more rounded perspective.

Each to their own.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You cannot be a serious individual

posted on 24/1/20

comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm aware and I'm not against eating meat. I'm against it being consumed lunch and dinner 7 times a week,

If we all cut down to 3 portions of meat a week some studies say we could reduce farmland by 75% globally.

Thats a hell of a lot of land to reforest, capturing carbon, helping to reduce global temperatures, providing habitat for wildlife, nature and recreational spaces.

Being dismissive of the cost of eating meat is the height of folly, its not just the 30g of protein, it's the 300g of protein grown to create that 30, it's the tractor emissions, water usage, pesticides that go in to growing all those beans, it's the land required for those beans..

Instead, those beans could feed 10 people their 30g of protein. As i said, repeatedly I LOVE meat, but you cannot deny the arithmetic, nor the other consequences. Agriculture is the biggest source of carbon emissions, and a huge part of that is growing 10x the crops to create lamb and beef, pork is a much better converter of protein, 3g for every 1g of meat in fact, chicken is also much better than lamb or beef.

Eggs are of the best sources of protein per kg of CO2e
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason to cut down on meat in general and more reason to cut down on beef, lamb and pork. Eggs, cow's milk, poultry and fish are on a par or only a bit higher in environmental impact compared to vegan foods like legumes, nuts and seeds. This is why people are so distrustful because there is clearly an anti all meat vegan agenda hidden in the environmentalist movement that has nothing to do with wanting to save the environment and everything to do with wanting to force their vegan cult on people. If a prominent vegan came out and said "continue eating poultry and fish as normal but cut down on red meats” then that would have a much more positive impact. It would come across as genuinely sincere and not done anti meat crusade with a handy environmentalism cause to hide behind

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are fundamentally ignoring some of the science there.

I'll reiterate too, I'm not a vegan, and there is absoloutely a need to cut down on meat in general, pigs are the most efficient converters of protein yet you lump them in with ruminant and give a pass to the less efficient poultry..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry going off memory from a graphic I saw pork might be low impact too. The point is there is zero need to cut down these meats as they are on a par or only slightly higher than vegan foods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SOME vegan foods, Tofu for instance can be pretty high i terms of carbon equivalent per kg, but you always have outliers.. Out of season air frieghted asparagus is comparable to beef..

Lentils, beans, mushrooms etc are all far lower in Co2e than meats, its undeniable, as is the maths, if you feed 10g of grain protein to an animal to get 1g of meat protein you can massively reduce land usage by cutting out the middle creature and consuming the grain directly, it ONLY makes sense where animals eat foods humans cannot. Hence free range grass fed meat is commendable

posted on 24/1/20

comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recoveri... (U11882)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Black Hawk (U16342)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recoveri... (U11882)
posted about a minute ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm aware and I'm not against eating meat. I'm against it being consumed lunch and dinner 7 times a week,

If we all cut down to 3 portions of meat a week some studies say we could reduce farmland by 75% globally.

Thats a hell of a lot of land to reforest, capturing carbon, helping to reduce global temperatures, providing habitat for wildlife, nature and recreational spaces.

Being dismissive of the cost of eating meat is the height of folly, its not just the 30g of protein, it's the 300g of protein grown to create that 30, it's the tractor emissions, water usage, pesticides that go in to growing all those beans, it's the land required for those beans..

Instead, those beans could feed 10 people their 30g of protein. As i said, repeatedly I LOVE meat, but you cannot deny the arithmetic, nor the other consequences. Agriculture is the biggest source of carbon emissions, and a huge part of that is growing 10x the crops to create lamb and beef, pork is a much better converter of protein, 3g for every 1g of meat in fact, chicken is also much better than lamb or beef.

Eggs are of the best sources of protein per kg of CO2e
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason to cut down on meat in general and more reason to cut down on beef, lamb and pork. Eggs, cow's milk, poultry and fish are on a par or only a bit higher in environmental impact compared to vegan foods like legumes, nuts and seeds. This is why people are so distrustful because there is clearly an anti all meat vegan agenda hidden in the environmentalist movement that has nothing to do with wanting to save the environment and everything to do with wanting to force their vegan cult on people. If a prominent vegan came out and said "continue eating poultry and fish as normal but cut down on red meats” then that would have a much more positive impact. It would come across as genuinely sincere and not done anti meat crusade with a handy environmentalism cause to hide behind

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's a strange comparison of foods! Most vegans do not replace their meat with nuts and seeds lol, the diet is mostly made up of grains tbh. Also, I'm not sure how you compare the impacts of fishing to agriculture, as it has been well recorded that we are overfishing!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They do if they want their protein. You get negligible protein in grains and high protein in nuts and seeds.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry, but there is a wealth of evidence that their diets have less impacts to the environment.

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

Give my head peace, what are you disagreeing with?

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm aware and I'm not against eating meat. I'm against it being consumed lunch and dinner 7 times a week,

If we all cut down to 3 portions of meat a week some studies say we could reduce farmland by 75% globally.

Thats a hell of a lot of land to reforest, capturing carbon, helping to reduce global temperatures, providing habitat for wildlife, nature and recreational spaces.

Being dismissive of the cost of eating meat is the height of folly, its not just the 30g of protein, it's the 300g of protein grown to create that 30, it's the tractor emissions, water usage, pesticides that go in to growing all those beans, it's the land required for those beans..

Instead, those beans could feed 10 people their 30g of protein. As i said, repeatedly I LOVE meat, but you cannot deny the arithmetic, nor the other consequences. Agriculture is the biggest source of carbon emissions, and a huge part of that is growing 10x the crops to create lamb and beef, pork is a much better converter of protein, 3g for every 1g of meat in fact, chicken is also much better than lamb or beef.

Eggs are of the best sources of protein per kg of CO2e
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason to cut down on meat in general and more reason to cut down on beef, lamb and pork. Eggs, cow's milk, poultry and fish are on a par or only a bit higher in environmental impact compared to vegan foods like legumes, nuts and seeds. This is why people are so distrustful because there is clearly an anti all meat vegan agenda hidden in the environmentalist movement that has nothing to do with wanting to save the environment and everything to do with wanting to force their vegan cult on people. If a prominent vegan came out and said "continue eating poultry and fish as normal but cut down on red meats” then that would have a much more positive impact. It would come across as genuinely sincere and not done anti meat crusade with a handy environmentalism cause to hide behind

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are fundamentally ignoring some of the science there.

I'll reiterate too, I'm not a vegan, and there is absoloutely a need to cut down on meat in general, pigs are the most efficient converters of protein yet you lump them in with ruminant and give a pass to the less efficient poultry..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry going off memory from a graphic I saw pork might be low impact too. The point is there is zero need to cut down these meats as they are on a par or only slightly higher than vegan foods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SOME vegan foods, Tofu for instance can be pretty high i terms of carbon equivalent per kg, but you always have outliers.. Out of season air frieghted asparagus is comparable to beef..

Lentils, beans, mushrooms etc are all far lower in Co2e than meats, its undeniable, as is the maths, if you feed 10g of grain protein to an animal to get 1g of meat protein you can massively reduce land usage by cutting out the middle creature and consuming the grain directly, it ONLY makes sense where animals eat foods humans cannot. Hence free range grass fed meat is commendable
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

There has not been a more successful opponent if fascism in human history than Churchill

Idgaf what quotes and minor incidents you place against him

posted on 24/1/20

comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm aware and I'm not against eating meat. I'm against it being consumed lunch and dinner 7 times a week,

If we all cut down to 3 portions of meat a week some studies say we could reduce farmland by 75% globally.

Thats a hell of a lot of land to reforest, capturing carbon, helping to reduce global temperatures, providing habitat for wildlife, nature and recreational spaces.

Being dismissive of the cost of eating meat is the height of folly, its not just the 30g of protein, it's the 300g of protein grown to create that 30, it's the tractor emissions, water usage, pesticides that go in to growing all those beans, it's the land required for those beans..

Instead, those beans could feed 10 people their 30g of protein. As i said, repeatedly I LOVE meat, but you cannot deny the arithmetic, nor the other consequences. Agriculture is the biggest source of carbon emissions, and a huge part of that is growing 10x the crops to create lamb and beef, pork is a much better converter of protein, 3g for every 1g of meat in fact, chicken is also much better than lamb or beef.

Eggs are of the best sources of protein per kg of CO2e
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason to cut down on meat in general and more reason to cut down on beef, lamb and pork. Eggs, cow's milk, poultry and fish are on a par or only a bit higher in environmental impact compared to vegan foods like legumes, nuts and seeds. This is why people are so distrustful because there is clearly an anti all meat vegan agenda hidden in the environmentalist movement that has nothing to do with wanting to save the environment and everything to do with wanting to force their vegan cult on people. If a prominent vegan came out and said "continue eating poultry and fish as normal but cut down on red meats” then that would have a much more positive impact. It would come across as genuinely sincere and not done anti meat crusade with a handy environmentalism cause to hide behind

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are fundamentally ignoring some of the science there.

I'll reiterate too, I'm not a vegan, and there is absoloutely a need to cut down on meat in general, pigs are the most efficient converters of protein yet you lump them in with ruminant and give a pass to the less efficient poultry..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry going off memory from a graphic I saw pork might be low impact too. The point is there is zero need to cut down these meats as they are on a par or only slightly higher than vegan foods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I did remember correctly, pork is bad. Poultry is better than rice.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/medicalxpress.com/news/2020-01-climate-friendly-food-choices-planet-health.amp

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted less than a minute ago
There has not been a more successful opponent if fascism in human history than Churchill

Idgaf what quotes and minor incidents you place against him
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Read a book ffs!

posted on 24/1/20

The striking thing about that graphic is all the really low impact vegan fruits are all massively carb heavy with little protein. Of course carbohydrate rich foods have less environment impact. However protein rich vegan foods are comparable to poultry, eggs and cow's milk. So if you want to get your protein then both vegan and non red meat animals are similar. This is why there is zero reason to cut down on poultry, eggs etc. as switching to vegan will offer little environmental benefit.

posted on 24/1/20

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

posted on 24/1/20

Cow's milk has less impact than legumes, yogurt has less impact than nuts and seeds, poultry had marginally more impact than nuts and seeds. These are your main vegan protein sources being beaten or matched by some animal products.

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Hector (U3606)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted less than a minute ago
There has not been a more successful opponent if fascism in human history than Churchill

Idgaf what quotes and minor incidents you place against him
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Read a book ffs!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Literally a history grad

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

So you should know better.

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

You have a warped sense of history

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

You're entire reading is obviously political

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

your ignorant.

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

*you're

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

If you only read secondary sources you agree with this is what happens

posted on 24/1/20

comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by My name’s t!tty and I’m a recovering gobshiite. I actually respect and admire all opposition fans, but particularly my United brethren. Please ignore my rants, I just can’t help it. (U11882)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 25 minutes ago
I'm aware and I'm not against eating meat. I'm against it being consumed lunch and dinner 7 times a week,

If we all cut down to 3 portions of meat a week some studies say we could reduce farmland by 75% globally.

Thats a hell of a lot of land to reforest, capturing carbon, helping to reduce global temperatures, providing habitat for wildlife, nature and recreational spaces.

Being dismissive of the cost of eating meat is the height of folly, its not just the 30g of protein, it's the 300g of protein grown to create that 30, it's the tractor emissions, water usage, pesticides that go in to growing all those beans, it's the land required for those beans..

Instead, those beans could feed 10 people their 30g of protein. As i said, repeatedly I LOVE meat, but you cannot deny the arithmetic, nor the other consequences. Agriculture is the biggest source of carbon emissions, and a huge part of that is growing 10x the crops to create lamb and beef, pork is a much better converter of protein, 3g for every 1g of meat in fact, chicken is also much better than lamb or beef.

Eggs are of the best sources of protein per kg of CO2e
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is no reason to cut down on meat in general and more reason to cut down on beef, lamb and pork. Eggs, cow's milk, poultry and fish are on a par or only a bit higher in environmental impact compared to vegan foods like legumes, nuts and seeds. This is why people are so distrustful because there is clearly an anti all meat vegan agenda hidden in the environmentalist movement that has nothing to do with wanting to save the environment and everything to do with wanting to force their vegan cult on people. If a prominent vegan came out and said "continue eating poultry and fish as normal but cut down on red meats” then that would have a much more positive impact. It would come across as genuinely sincere and not done anti meat crusade with a handy environmentalism cause to hide behind

----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are fundamentally ignoring some of the science there.

I'll reiterate too, I'm not a vegan, and there is absoloutely a need to cut down on meat in general, pigs are the most efficient converters of protein yet you lump them in with ruminant and give a pass to the less efficient poultry..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry going off memory from a graphic I saw pork might be low impact too. The point is there is zero need to cut down these meats as they are on a par or only slightly higher than vegan foods.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I did remember correctly, pork is bad. Poultry is better than rice.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/medicalxpress.com/news/2020-01-climate-friendly-food-choices-planet-health.amp

----------------------------------------------------------------------
New Zealand based, all of it. Relating only to new Zealand, its methods of production, transport to and from New Zealand based on their eating habits.

Has little global relevance compared to a book like "How bad are bananas" which looks at things on a global scale.

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted less than a minute ago
If you only read secondary sources you agree with this is what happens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As opposed to reading his-story?

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

comment by Hector (U3606)
posted about a minute ago
comment by Blarmy (U14547)
posted less than a minute ago
If you only read secondary sources you agree with this is what happens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As opposed to reading his-story?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Which is a primary source ffs

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

oh ffs!

comment by Blarmy (U14547)

posted on 24/1/20

Are you drunk

comment by Hector (U3606)

posted on 24/1/20

No, are you?

Page 6757 of 6944

Sign in if you want to comment