Sorry, it wasn't my intent to be a dick. I just get sick of people (usually annoying vegans) quoting vegan propaganda, usually as unquestionable fact.
Your tone was obviously not implying it as such, so my bad. ...okay, so it was my intent to be a dick. It was just misplaced intent. Is that any better?
I laughed out loud at this. This caused my friend and my girlfriend to ask what was so funny. I then told them the joke, and neither of them got it.:|
I'm glad you're here for me, Slashdot.
It's amazing how people just take such propaganda at face value. Did vegetable consumption increase? Definitely. Was it all, or even the most significant thing that changed? Not by a long shot. http://rawfoodsos.com/2011/09/22/forks-over-knives-is-the-science-legit-a-review-and-critique/
200% increase in fish, 50% decrease in sugar, 40% decrease in margarine, 20% decrease in energy intake.
None of that was at all helpful. How does fiber even matter when meat doesn't even make it to your large intestine?
And yes, there are tons of reports that make the errors I stated.
I even forgot to throw in the condition of the meat being raised naturally--free of antibiotic and hormone cocktails most animals are raised on today.
Care to link to a study that:
1. Doesn't conflate red meat and processed meats
2. Doesn't use cooking methods that char the hell out of the meat, generating HCAs?
I'm all for eating well, but I remain skeptical that healthy animals produce unhealthful meat.
Gotta love the English language. Much and little are mostly opposite, but mean pretty much the same thing in these contexts.
But yeah, this is totally revolutionary bro.
I never said anything about not allowing questions. You're obviously correct in that questions, debate, and dissent are vital parts of science.
You couldn't have anything scientific on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin because there aren't any.
There's nothing to observe, nothing to hypothesize about, nothing to theorize about in your example.
Is forming and testing a hypothesis not science? Your claim that it's not science unless it's incontrovertible is simply ignorant.
Hypotheses and theories have come and gone. Laws have been shown to be a mere portion of another law. Science progresses, and we never reach 100% certainty.
Now if this were *real* science, one side or the other would be able to unequivocally silence the other with incontrivertable facts.
I don't think science means what you think it means.
You're saying that data, models, and research don't qualify as science?
That for something to qualify as science, it has to be completely, without a doubt, 100% impossible to argue against?
Even if every one of the bottom 90% put all the money they could towards bribes^H^H^H^H^H^H "contributions" for our lovely leaders, we wouldn't even come close to what interested corporations/conglomerates "contribute".
What makes for a more interesting story: script kiddies taking down a CIA webpage, or some computer geeks getting together to see who the best geek is?
I know what I think is the more interesting story, but I'm sure common folk would disagree.
"A system for the treatment of disease by minute doses of natural substances that in a healthy person would produce symptoms of disease"
How is this homeopathy? Just because something doesn't suggest that the only way to help someone with a disease is to throw pills at them until something happens, doesn't make it homeopathic.
Boss: Oh, sorry, I didn't get that email. It must not have gone through.
Me: Why would just that one email not "go through"?
Boss: I don't know, you're the IT guy.
Slashdot Mirror
From the page you linked to: Google Maps
Sorry, it wasn't my intent to be a dick. I just get sick of people (usually annoying vegans) quoting vegan propaganda, usually as unquestionable fact.
...okay, so it was my intent to be a dick. It was just misplaced intent. Is that any better?
Your tone was obviously not implying it as such, so my bad.
I laughed out loud at this. This caused my friend and my girlfriend to ask what was so funny. I then told them the joke, and neither of them got it. :|
I'm glad you're here for me, Slashdot.
So you're suggesting that all hunters are wasteful and disrespectful to nature?
You are completely missing the spirit of hunting.
Direct link to the data: http://rawfoodsos.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/norway_food_changes.jpg
It's amazing how people just take such propaganda at face value. Did vegetable consumption increase? Definitely. Was it all, or even the most significant thing that changed? Not by a long shot.
/rolleyes
http://rawfoodsos.com/2011/09/22/forks-over-knives-is-the-science-legit-a-review-and-critique/
200% increase in fish, 50% decrease in sugar, 40% decrease in margarine, 20% decrease in energy intake.
Oh, but it was without doubt the meat.
None of that was at all helpful. How does fiber even matter when meat doesn't even make it to your large intestine?
And yes, there are tons of reports that make the errors I stated.
I even forgot to throw in the condition of the meat being raised naturally--free of antibiotic and hormone cocktails most animals are raised on today.
Care to link to a study that:
1. Doesn't conflate red meat and processed meats
2. Doesn't use cooking methods that char the hell out of the meat, generating HCAs?
I'm all for eating well, but I remain skeptical that healthy animals produce unhealthful meat.
OS X 10.8 does more to integrate social networking and file-synching into a personal computer than any other OS I've seen.
You didn't look very hard, did you?
how much exercise people really need
how little exercise do we need
Gotta love the English language. Much and little are mostly opposite, but mean pretty much the same thing in these contexts.
But yeah, this is totally revolutionary bro.
I never said anything about not allowing questions. You're obviously correct in that questions, debate, and dissent are vital parts of science.
You couldn't have anything scientific on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin because there aren't any.
There's nothing to observe, nothing to hypothesize about, nothing to theorize about in your example.
Is forming and testing a hypothesis not science? Your claim that it's not science unless it's incontrovertible is simply ignorant.
Hypotheses and theories have come and gone. Laws have been shown to be a mere portion of another law. Science progresses, and we never reach 100% certainty.
Now if this were *real* science, one side or the other would be able to unequivocally silence the other with incontrivertable facts.
I don't think science means what you think it means.
You're saying that data, models, and research don't qualify as science?
That for something to qualify as science, it has to be completely, without a doubt, 100% impossible to argue against?
whoosh
His user # is only 38532. He was soooo late to the party.
Also, mods: WTF? Why is this post marked redundant.
I was curious about that myself.
"a few segments of the GPU have been disabled"
As in, can be re-enabled with a custom BIOS or something?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Action#US_only_vs_global_.28all_users.29
Throw your vote in.
Even if every one of the bottom 90% put all the money they could towards bribes^H^H^H^H^H^H "contributions" for our lovely leaders, we wouldn't even come close to what interested corporations/conglomerates "contribute".
What makes for a more interesting story: script kiddies taking down a CIA webpage, or some computer geeks getting together to see who the best geek is?
I know what I think is the more interesting story, but I'm sure common folk would disagree.
"A system for the treatment of disease by minute doses of natural substances that in a healthy person would produce symptoms of disease" How is this homeopathy? Just because something doesn't suggest that the only way to help someone with a disease is to throw pills at them until something happens, doesn't make it homeopathic.
Boss: Oh, sorry, I didn't get that email. It must not have gone through. Me: Why would just that one email not "go through"? Boss: I don't know, you're the IT guy.
Yes, because cars are unimaginably intricate organic machines created by millenia of evolution. Apples and lugnuts.
Bacon, eggs, and butter sound a lot healthier to me than low-fat, vegetable oil, and engineered.