cardiovascular problems results from metabolic syndrome, which results from too much sugar in the diet, another bane of a modern western rich diet. a person who eats only meat and nuts will not have any cardiovascular problems. both high in fat, both harmless
it is the triglycerides that the liver makes from excess sugar that kills the heart. the excess sugar gives you diabetes, and makes you fat. and some say, even gives you cancer. metabolic syndrome is the result of too much sugar in the diet. metabolic syndrome is the cause of obesity, diabetes, strokes, and heart attacks
so enjoy your bacon, stay away from the corn syrup, and you won't have a heart attack
the meat eater will outlive the fruit eater
you need to update your dietary theories from the 1980s. fat is not your problem. sugar is
two people I would not have thought about in the same way, before today
you know what? i grew up on a farm. i've butchered animals. i've milked them. i've bottlefed them. i've healed them. i've euthanized them. i've midwifed them. i'm completely unimpressed
modern living in the west means we are disconnected from our food sources like no generation before us. the chicken nuggets on our plate bear no cognitive relationship to the actual chickens we see, probably, only on television or the internet
then, at age 10, you ride by a truck on the highway, and see some movement in the slats and a pink snout trying to poke out: pigs going to slaughter
and for the first time, you realize what's going on
and you think you are witnessing fucking auschwitz
it's so fucking maudlin!
such contrived weepy empty drama from the mind of people raised more artificially than their food!
it's just food you coddled cloistered fucks. it has a brain? it has thoughts? emotions? so what! has this EVER fucking mattered in hundreds of millions of years of carnivore catching prey on the savannah or in the jungle or in the seas?
feel the inside of your mouth. between your incisors and your molars (you have both, you're an omnivore): you can feel two jagged teeth. these are called your CANINES. they are MADE to RIP flesh from bone and masticate it. you ARE an eater of meat. says hundreds of millions of years of evolution. says what every previous generation of YOU did, going back generations since before your ancestors were human, even mammal
now THAT'S natural morality (as opposed to human morality, which governs our relationship with other humans, NOT that which governs the relationships in the natural world or our relationship with it)
our grandparents and greatgrandparents and every generation before that grew up in societies where domestic farm animals were in earshot and smelling distance away, their entire lives. before they could talk they were aware that the geese squawing outside for the past few months wasn't squawking anymore because it was on the dinner plate tonight. no. big. deal
in fact, today, most of humanity lives like this: humans and ducks, pigs, cattle, etc., all bric-a-brac next to each other in a cacophony of noises and smells. this is reality. this is normalcy. the majority of humanity, in time and space, does not consider eating meat or who butchers it an issue
it's only an issue for rich coddled drama queens who grow up in hermetically sealed lives away from their food sources. in other words, your "morality" is as artificial and inconsequential to the reality of life on earth and of the majority of humanity, as your rich upbringing is (if you were born in the west, in the modern era, you are rich, according to any previous generation or every other contemporaneous society)
meat is food. meat is good. tonight i am going to have myself some chicken nuggets, and i'm going to enjoy it, knowing full well what i am eating was once a chirping chicken. who FUCKING cares. get the fuck over yourselves, rich sheltered westeners. you live in an artificial hermetically sealed environment, and some of your attitudes are pathetic reflections of your artificial unreal upbringing
consciousness? what is so strange or mystical about it?
"our subjective personal experience of conciousness isn't scientifically explainable"
ok. my subjective personal experience of "Kung Fu Panda 2" isn't scientifically explainable either. so what? why all the hocus pocus? consciousness is rather mundane and simple
ok, push back against anything you like. whatever. if it's not science, it has no meaning to me. i'm sure it has meaning to someone, but i'm not interested in that which any late night marijuana-fueled brainstorm can produce, without any validation
my point is the entire discussion is useless and a waste of time
a link is imagined. ok, and? that is not enough reason to take it seriously as a topic of discussion
for example: i claim that the sun runs on electricity. let's discuss this idea for five hours. why? why does my silly idea have to be taken seriously or discussed? it doesn't
there is nothing to discuss, because nothing worth our time has been proposed, just a silly imaginative idea. everyone has silly imaginative ideas, many at a rate of 10 per hour. are they all worthy of discussion?
no, the problem is the cottonheaded idealism. did you happen to notice the experiments in communism in the last century? how much suffering that created? but you're going to trust anything communistic with some sort of hope, still? really? are you that fucking daft?
people can write a million erudite compelling passionate books about social and political organization. who the fuck gives a shit if it doesn't work in the real world. guess what: communism doesn't work in the real world, i don't care what rare subspecies you can point to as untried: it's castles in the sky built on a failed set of assumptions of human nature. it doesn't matter how many endless variations you spin off, if the essential assumptions are rotten, the whole edifice is without validity or reason, and is doomed to collapse
face it, communism is for the dustbin of history, it is no more. the entirety of the edifice of communism, and all of its subspecies, is without interest to anyone serious
i think your problem is is that what you call cynicism is actually realism. but to admit some ugly truths about this world and human nature is so depressing or painful to you, you write off some ugly but essential truths about humanity as cynicism. this allows you to instead embrace and describe as "reality" some feel-good hopes about human nature that aren't actually dominant in human societies, and never were, and never will be
you need to accept some really ugly things about humanity which are immovable, unfortunately. then you can start to say something intelligent about political and social organization. right now, you are a cottonheaded dreamer, keeping a flame for a passion alive, a passion which the world as a whole has moved past and is not returning to
"People like Marx, Luxembourg, DeLeon, and Gramsci had a lot to say about the world and you can't just dismiss all of 19th century philosophy by kicking a rock"
i am utterly dismissing it. failed experiments of history. it's 2011. stop living in the 20th century. communism and all its flavors are over and most certainly very dead and not returning. i don't care how many skulls with a little bit of dust inside you still point to as great thinkers
a 4:3 to the left, a 16:9 in the middle, and the 9:16 to the right
a typical arrangement is the 4:3 showing my inbox, the 16:9 showing output x5 (chrome/opera/firefox/ie/safari), and the 9:16 showing Visual Studio 2010, tabbed pages of code, XSLT, CSS, HTML, ASHX, JS, etc.
no, i shot my mouth off and got a shaming i deserved, to your credit you weren't even mean about it and i would have been. i shall endeavour to be a better person
well, considering how your country gave us chernobyl, on the question of nuclear power then, no, sorry, the neoimperialist petrogarchy of russia is not a nation to be taken seriously
try cleaning up your mafia goon government and your ridiculous cynical corruption, then get back to us about why we should take russia seriously
agrarianism will always assert itself in some small amounts in the shadow of larger societies where people feel more affinity for a mostly self-sufficient local group than a larger society or nation. but it tells us nothing about how to run a large modern country like the usa or germany
anarcho-communism meanwhile is the preferred terminology for agrarianism by people who are urban or suburban, know more about alternative music than about growing their own food, and need a new "cool" word to describe their idealistic utopianism that will never work... unless you actually do go out in the woods and start growing your own food
so go, to the woods, good luck, please, and start your anarcho-communist collective. so i don't have to hear about this useless mental diarrhea again
you will of course lump me with the Grabby McRichguys of the world because i don't embrace your cottonheaded idealism. no, i have no love for your favorite boogeyman nor do i think capitalism is a wonderful thing. i do know, however, that capitalism works with less suffering and injustice than your loopy theories about how society can or should work
because i dislike capitalism does not mean i am eager to embrace even worse ideologies that you for some bad reason are a proponent for
the greatest work station epiphany i recently had involved turning my 9:16 monitor 90 degrees
great for reading code and long articles
unless the article is stretched out in little snippets over a number of pages, like the article this story links to. i hate that. and apparently its for advertising purposes. how are advertising purposes served by chasing me away from finishing the article?
de-evolution may not have a meaning, but devolution has a meaning: gradually becoming an early 80s band that wore red conical pyramid hats and liked to whip it, whip it good
Slashdot Mirror
humans eat meat. in all societies. throughout all of history
i guess people will believe all sorts of ignorant things
cardiovascular problems results from metabolic syndrome, which results from too much sugar in the diet, another bane of a modern western rich diet. a person who eats only meat and nuts will not have any cardiovascular problems. both high in fat, both harmless
it is the triglycerides that the liver makes from excess sugar that kills the heart. the excess sugar gives you diabetes, and makes you fat. and some say, even gives you cancer. metabolic syndrome is the result of too much sugar in the diet. metabolic syndrome is the cause of obesity, diabetes, strokes, and heart attacks
so enjoy your bacon, stay away from the corn syrup, and you won't have a heart attack
the meat eater will outlive the fruit eater
you need to update your dietary theories from the 1980s. fat is not your problem. sugar is
christ, why google?
you're willing to drop coin on free browsers and free email, but not translation services? you don't see any leverage here? really?
how boneheaded
two people I would not have thought about in the same way, before today
you know what? i grew up on a farm. i've butchered animals. i've milked them. i've bottlefed them. i've healed them. i've euthanized them. i've midwifed them. i'm completely unimpressed
modern living in the west means we are disconnected from our food sources like no generation before us. the chicken nuggets on our plate bear no cognitive relationship to the actual chickens we see, probably, only on television or the internet
then, at age 10, you ride by a truck on the highway, and see some movement in the slats and a pink snout trying to poke out: pigs going to slaughter
and for the first time, you realize what's going on
and you think you are witnessing fucking auschwitz
it's so fucking maudlin!
such contrived weepy empty drama from the mind of people raised more artificially than their food!
it's just food you coddled cloistered fucks. it has a brain? it has thoughts? emotions? so what! has this EVER fucking mattered in hundreds of millions of years of carnivore catching prey on the savannah or in the jungle or in the seas?
feel the inside of your mouth. between your incisors and your molars (you have both, you're an omnivore): you can feel two jagged teeth. these are called your CANINES. they are MADE to RIP flesh from bone and masticate it. you ARE an eater of meat. says hundreds of millions of years of evolution. says what every previous generation of YOU did, going back generations since before your ancestors were human, even mammal
now THAT'S natural morality (as opposed to human morality, which governs our relationship with other humans, NOT that which governs the relationships in the natural world or our relationship with it)
our grandparents and greatgrandparents and every generation before that grew up in societies where domestic farm animals were in earshot and smelling distance away, their entire lives. before they could talk they were aware that the geese squawing outside for the past few months wasn't squawking anymore because it was on the dinner plate tonight. no. big. deal
in fact, today, most of humanity lives like this: humans and ducks, pigs, cattle, etc., all bric-a-brac next to each other in a cacophony of noises and smells. this is reality. this is normalcy. the majority of humanity, in time and space, does not consider eating meat or who butchers it an issue
it's only an issue for rich coddled drama queens who grow up in hermetically sealed lives away from their food sources. in other words, your "morality" is as artificial and inconsequential to the reality of life on earth and of the majority of humanity, as your rich upbringing is (if you were born in the west, in the modern era, you are rich, according to any previous generation or every other contemporaneous society)
meat is food. meat is good. tonight i am going to have myself some chicken nuggets, and i'm going to enjoy it, knowing full well what i am eating was once a chirping chicken. who FUCKING cares. get the fuck over yourselves, rich sheltered westeners. you live in an artificial hermetically sealed environment, and some of your attitudes are pathetic reflections of your artificial unreal upbringing
meat is not murder. meat is TASTY
one final thought:
BACON
(*lips smack*)
case closed
consciousness? what is so strange or mystical about it?
"our subjective personal experience of conciousness isn't scientifically explainable"
ok. my subjective personal experience of "Kung Fu Panda 2" isn't scientifically explainable either. so what? why all the hocus pocus? consciousness is rather mundane and simple
ok, push back against anything you like. whatever. if it's not science, it has no meaning to me. i'm sure it has meaning to someone, but i'm not interested in that which any late night marijuana-fueled brainstorm can produce, without any validation
i read
"Student Finds Miss Universe's Mass"
my point is the entire discussion is useless and a waste of time
a link is imagined. ok, and? that is not enough reason to take it seriously as a topic of discussion
for example: i claim that the sun runs on electricity. let's discuss this idea for five hours. why? why does my silly idea have to be taken seriously or discussed? it doesn't
there is nothing to discuss, because nothing worth our time has been proposed, just a silly imaginative idea. everyone has silly imaginative ideas, many at a rate of 10 per hour. are they all worthy of discussion?
i claim leprechauns hide gold at the end of rainbows. this is truth, that should be discussed seriously, until you prove otherwise
pfffffffft
thank you for your religious beliefs
without proof, the default position is there is no link
it is not my job to disprove your unproven claim, it is your job to prove it in the first place
since you can't do that, what you have written above is not science, it's a religious faith-based belief
how can you claim there is a link?
the burden of proof is to show the link, not to say "there is a link, and i have no proof, i just know there is"
it is not my job to disprove that which you claim without proof. it is your job to prove your claim
i can say there is no god, because there is no proof. you can get angry and say how can you prove there isn't a god
same ridiculous argument
no, the problem is the cottonheaded idealism. did you happen to notice the experiments in communism in the last century? how much suffering that created? but you're going to trust anything communistic with some sort of hope, still? really? are you that fucking daft?
people can write a million erudite compelling passionate books about social and political organization. who the fuck gives a shit if it doesn't work in the real world. guess what: communism doesn't work in the real world, i don't care what rare subspecies you can point to as untried: it's castles in the sky built on a failed set of assumptions of human nature. it doesn't matter how many endless variations you spin off, if the essential assumptions are rotten, the whole edifice is without validity or reason, and is doomed to collapse
face it, communism is for the dustbin of history, it is no more. the entirety of the edifice of communism, and all of its subspecies, is without interest to anyone serious
i think your problem is is that what you call cynicism is actually realism. but to admit some ugly truths about this world and human nature is so depressing or painful to you, you write off some ugly but essential truths about humanity as cynicism. this allows you to instead embrace and describe as "reality" some feel-good hopes about human nature that aren't actually dominant in human societies, and never were, and never will be
you need to accept some really ugly things about humanity which are immovable, unfortunately. then you can start to say something intelligent about political and social organization. right now, you are a cottonheaded dreamer, keeping a flame for a passion alive, a passion which the world as a whole has moved past and is not returning to
"People like Marx, Luxembourg, DeLeon, and Gramsci had a lot to say about the world and you can't just dismiss all of 19th century philosophy by kicking a rock"
i am utterly dismissing it. failed experiments of history. it's 2011. stop living in the 20th century. communism and all its flavors are over and most certainly very dead and not returning. i don't care how many skulls with a little bit of dust inside you still point to as great thinkers
it's over
i embrace the struggle for freedom
but how the fuck "anarcho-communism" has anything to do with freedom is completely beyond my comprehension
oh, i have no doubt you can explain it to me. there's proponents for all sorts of half-baked ideas in this world
logical coherence is not a prerequisite for enthusiasm
(snicker)
i have 3 monitors
a 4:3 to the left, a 16:9 in the middle, and the 9:16 to the right
a typical arrangement is the 4:3 showing my inbox, the 16:9 showing output x5 (chrome/opera/firefox/ie/safari), and the 9:16 showing Visual Studio 2010, tabbed pages of code, XSLT, CSS, HTML, ASHX, JS, etc.
LOL
nothing here to see except typical nationalistic ego tweaking, jealousies, and grudges. move along
thread winner
no, imax workstations ;-)
the matrix
"so i was bored and decided to check out a flick i hadn't seen but a lot of neurons were raving about, and let me just say, HOLY SHIT IT'S REALITY"
no, i shot my mouth off and got a shaming i deserved, to your credit you weren't even mean about it and i would have been. i shall endeavour to be a better person
well, considering how your country gave us chernobyl, on the question of nuclear power then, no, sorry, the neoimperialist petrogarchy of russia is not a nation to be taken seriously
try cleaning up your mafia goon government and your ridiculous cynical corruption, then get back to us about why we should take russia seriously
you're talking about agrarianism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrarianism
agrarianism will always assert itself in some small amounts in the shadow of larger societies where people feel more affinity for a mostly self-sufficient local group than a larger society or nation. but it tells us nothing about how to run a large modern country like the usa or germany
anarcho-communism meanwhile is the preferred terminology for agrarianism by people who are urban or suburban, know more about alternative music than about growing their own food, and need a new "cool" word to describe their idealistic utopianism that will never work... unless you actually do go out in the woods and start growing your own food
so go, to the woods, good luck, please, and start your anarcho-communist collective. so i don't have to hear about this useless mental diarrhea again
you will of course lump me with the Grabby McRichguys of the world because i don't embrace your cottonheaded idealism. no, i have no love for your favorite boogeyman nor do i think capitalism is a wonderful thing. i do know, however, that capitalism works with less suffering and injustice than your loopy theories about how society can or should work
because i dislike capitalism does not mean i am eager to embrace even worse ideologies that you for some bad reason are a proponent for
the greatest work station epiphany i recently had involved turning my 9:16 monitor 90 degrees
great for reading code and long articles
unless the article is stretched out in little snippets over a number of pages, like the article this story links to. i hate that. and apparently its for advertising purposes. how are advertising purposes served by chasing me away from finishing the article?
de-evolution may not have a meaning, but devolution has a meaning: gradually becoming an early 80s band that wore red conical pyramid hats and liked to whip it, whip it good
thank you, nuclear baghdad bob