On Jul 2, 4:04=A0pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> You sure did slink away quietly from the "inefficiency" issue. =A0I
showe=
d
> conclusively that ****witted "vegans" see their bull**** "inefficiency"
> argument against meat as something entirely separate from an
> environmental argument, and you just threw in the white towel, after
> waving it weakly for a few minutes.
>
> What the **** possessed you to argue for so long from such a weak
> position of ignorance, anyway? =A0I guess it must have been your usual
> partisan****p.
Well, the title of the thread is correct, I did concede that you had
proved your point.
My perspective on what happened is that you claimed for a number of
years that some vegans present an "inefficiency" argument entirely
separate from any environmental concerns or concerns about global food
distribution. I waited a number of years for you to produce a citation
to sup****t this contention. You finally got around to meeting your
obligation to do this, and I then politely conceded that you had
proved your point. And yes, I always agreed that this argument was a
poor one, I just wasn't convinced that anyone made it, and it was your
job to show me this, which you have now finally done. You see this as
being somehow weak, well, you're entitled to take that view.
Note that this is in contrast to when I proved that "axiomatisable" is
a real word, and you just stopped commenting on the issue, hoping that
eventually people would get bored and stop talking about it.
|
