On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:45:02 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 04:35:34 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:

snip

The difference between you and me is I want to reduce animal suffering.

no he does too,

'Reduce', so what level of animal suffering do you think *is*
acceptable OOI (just because you fancy eating their flesh, lactate and
periods)?

I'm vegetarian you fool. You make up too much junk.


but lacks basic critical thinking skills,

You mean the ones where people carry on causing suffering to animals ,
drinking the lactate meant for their children and eating their periods
you mean?

I mean the ones you'd need to understand the situation


and posts way too much to be worth addressing.

Ah, too much information for you to dispute?

too much confusion to be worth spending time on.


****ter is that way , this is a *discussion group* and you are more
than welcome to not join in and just STFU. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Or I can simply point out that your debate is not worth having. It would be if you could get more of the basics right & keep the quantity to the point where people can be bothered.

If you can't tell the difference between a period and an egg why would anyone engage with your stream of opinions?


NT

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 08:29:49 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:45:02 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 04:35:34 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:

snip

The difference between you and me is I want to reduce animal suffering.

no he does too,

'Reduce', so what level of animal suffering do you think *is*
acceptable OOI (just because you fancy eating their flesh, lactate and
periods)?

I'm vegetarian you fool.

Unfortunately, the dairy, fish and egg industries are worse in many
ways than the meat so I'm not sure that's help.

How much 'side catch' get's thrown overboard already dead?

You make up too much junk.

I don't make up anything. Prove anything I have 'made up' (or STFU).


but lacks basic critical thinking skills,

You mean the ones where people carry on causing suffering to animals ,
drinking the lactate meant for their children and eating their periods
you mean?

I mean the ones you'd need to understand the situation

Ah, and so you have all the answers and I don't, is that what you are
saying? What qualifications do you have on the subject then OOI?


and posts way too much to be worth addressing.

Ah, too much information for you to dispute?

too much confusion to be worth spending time on.

The confusion is yours my friend. Here it's very easy and simple.

Fact. We don't need to eat animals and there is enough viable landmass
for the current population (plus another 190M) to live on plant based
foods. It really couldn't get much less complicated?


****ter is that way , this is a *discussion group* and you are more
than welcome to not join in and just STFU. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Or I can simply point out that your debate is not worth having.

What, because *you* don't happen to agree with it? *You* think you
have more information or understand it better? If you have / do then
why don't you present it?

It would be if you could get more of the basics right & keep the quantity to the point where people can be bothered.

Like I said, it's not ****ter and the trolls will never stop being
trolls and any others might just think about any of it as it comes up.

I *know* it's 'manly' to eat meat (why do many men only cook at a
BBQ?), I don't expect everyone (or anyone) to suddenly stop eating
meat or any animal products here because of anything I have said, but
some *might* just question what they are doing and make some changes.

If you can't tell the difference between a period and an egg why would anyone engage with your stream of opinions?

It doesn't have to be a literal equivalent mate, it's a conceptual
thing to get the point across. And you ignore the overall message on
just one point?

Like, a chicken doesn't make and lay eggs for us to eat (no matter
what your Mum told you), they lay them to reproduce and would normally
(in the wild) be fertilised by a cockerel that was part of their
flock. They would then try to form a small clutch of eggs that they
would sit on and hatch. They might also beak (and / or eat) any eggs
they didn't like or want and so could recoup the protein and calcium.

There was a funny thing on the TV where an adult sent their kid into
someone's front garden to steal their chickens eggs and the (only two)
chickens pecked the kid and sent him running. I wonder why they
protected the eggs and didn't just let the kid take them (and the
point).

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 08:29:49 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 14:45:02 UTC+1, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 04:35:34 -0700 (PDT), tabbypurr wrote:

snip

The difference between you and me is I want to reduce animal suffering.

no he does too,

'Reduce', so what level of animal suffering do you think *is*
acceptable OOI (just because you fancy eating their flesh, lactate and
periods)?

I'm vegetarian you fool.

Unfortunately, the dairy, fish and egg industries are worse in many
ways than the meat so I'm not sure that's help.

How much 'side catch' get's thrown overboard already dead?

You make up too much junk.

I don't make up anything. Prove anything I have 'made up' (or STFU).


but lacks basic critical thinking skills,

You mean the ones where people carry on causing suffering to animals ,
drinking the lactate meant for their children and eating their periods
you mean?

I mean the ones you'd need to understand the situation

Ah, and so you have all the answers and I don't, is that what you are
saying? What qualifications do you have on the subject then OOI?


and posts way too much to be worth addressing.

Ah, too much information for you to dispute?

too much confusion to be worth spending time on.

The confusion is yours my friend. Here it's very easy and simple.

Fact. We don't need to eat animals and there is enough viable landmass
for the current population (plus another 190M) to live on plant based
foods. It really couldn't get much less complicated?


****ter is that way , this is a *discussion group* and you are more
than welcome to not join in and just STFU. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Or I can simply point out that your debate is not worth having.

What, because *you* don't happen to agree with it? *You* think you
have more information or understand it better? If you have / do then
why don't you present it?

It would be if you could get more of the basics right & keep the
quantity to the point where people can be bothered.

Like I said, it's not ****ter and the trolls will never stop being
trolls and any others might just think about any of it as it comes up.

I *know* it's 'manly' to eat meat (why do many men only cook at a
BBQ?), I don't expect everyone (or anyone) to suddenly stop eating
meat or any animal products here because of anything I have said, but
some *might* just question what they are doing and make some changes.

If you can't tell the difference between a period and an egg why would
anyone engage with your stream of opinions?

It doesn't have to be a literal equivalent mate, it's a conceptual
thing to get the point across. And you ignore the overall message on
just one point?

Like, a chicken doesn't make and lay eggs for us to eat (no matter
what your Mum told you), they lay them to reproduce and would normally
(in the wild) be fertilised by a cockerel that was part of their
flock. They would then try to form a small clutch of eggs that they
would sit on and hatch. They might also beak (and / or eat) any eggs
they didn't like or want and so could recoup the protein and calcium.


Fruit trees dont produce fruit for use to eat.

Vegetables dont grow for us to eat.

But you are perfectly happy to dig them up, tear them from the tree etc,
and so ending their life cycle just to feed your face.

No different to someone eating an egg or chicken etc, unless you are a left
brainer who refuses to see the big picture.

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 16:45:35 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Fruit trees don’t produce fruit for use to eat.

Of course they do, that's *THE WHOLE POINT* of most 'fruit', to be
eaten, shat out and any seed to grow away from the shade of the parent
tree. What the fruit tree didn't count on is that man invented the
water closet and therefore, fewer seeds ended up where *nature*
intended (apart from in your back garden of course, we know your dirty
little secret).

Vegetables don’t grow for us to eat.

Why do they grow OOI Brain?

But you are perfectly happy to dig them up, tear them from the tree etc,
and so ending their life cycle just to feed your face.

As do twice the number of livestock than humans of course.

And we only eat fruit when they are ready to be eaten, so that *is*
their life cycle complete. Unlike the chicken whose eggs you eat
that's killed a short way though it's life because it's reproductive
system has been exhausted. Or the 'lamb', 'veal' or 'piglet' that are
specifically dragged away from their parents and murdered, just
because you like eating children?

Your bizarre POV might stand a chance of flying if it wasn't 1)
bollox, 2) bollox or 3) trolling bollox.

https://ibb.co/r5LKpKF

So, lets say the human and the livestock ate one apple each, the
livestock (you love to kill and eat) would eat nearly twice as many as
we do, making the livestock (you love to kill and eat) more of a
problem than the humans are!

So, for you plan to have any value, the biggest impact we could have
on saving the fruit and vegetables is get rid of all that livestock,
that reduces the problem by 2/3rds. If we get rid of the humans
(especially the idiots like you) we only reduce the impact on the
fruit and veg by 1/3rd, all be it that the animals would be much
happier, not being tortured and killed by the likes of you.


No different to someone eating an egg

See above ... and you eat all of the farmed ones don't you Brain,
well, till the hens are exhausted then you kill them in gratitude for
all their hard work (that they neither asked for or deserved).

or chicken etc,

Apart from the above ... (where you show you still don't have a clue)
fruit trees don't recognise another 100 fruit trees faces, or need to
be killed 10 years into their 100 year lives because they are
exhausted, or run away when you threaten them (because they don't
experiences fear or pain).

unless you are a left
brainer who refuses to see the big picture.

Which is exactly why you don't 'Brain Ray'.

Have you been running the microwave with the door off again and it's
fried your brain, Brain?

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 16:45:35 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Fruit trees donÂ’t produce fruit for use to eat.

Of course they do, that's *THE WHOLE POINT* of most 'fruit', to be
eaten, shat out and any seed to grow away from the shade of the parent
tree. What the fruit tree didn't count on is that man invented the
water closet and therefore, fewer seeds ended up where *nature*
intended (apart from in your back garden of course, we know your dirty
little secret).

Vegetables donÂ’t grow for us to eat.

Why do they grow OOI Brain?

But you are perfectly happy to dig them up, tear them from the tree etc,
and so ending their life cycle just to feed your face.

As do twice the number of livestock than humans of course.

And we only eat fruit when they are ready to be eaten, so that *is*
their life cycle complete. Unlike the chicken whose eggs you eat
that's killed a short way though it's life because it's reproductive
system has been exhausted. Or the 'lamb', 'veal' or 'piglet' that are
specifically dragged away from their parents and murdered, just
because you like eating children?

Your bizarre POV might stand a chance of flying if it wasn't 1)
bollox, 2) bollox or 3) trolling bollox.

https://ibb.co/r5LKpKF

So, lets say the human and the livestock ate one apple each, the
livestock (you love to kill and eat) would eat nearly twice as many as
we do, making the livestock (you love to kill and eat) more of a
problem than the humans are!

So, for you plan to have any value, the biggest impact we could have
on saving the fruit and vegetables is get rid of all that livestock,
that reduces the problem by 2/3rds. If we get rid of the humans
(especially the idiots like you) we only reduce the impact on the
fruit and veg by 1/3rd, all be it that the animals would be much
happier, not being tortured and killed by the likes of you.


No different to someone eating an egg

See above ... and you eat all of the farmed ones don't you Brain,
well, till the hens are exhausted then you kill them in gratitude for
all their hard work (that they neither asked for or deserved).

or chicken etc,

Apart from the above ... (where you show you still don't have a clue)
fruit trees don't recognise another 100 fruit trees faces, or need to
be killed 10 years into their 100 year lives because they are
exhausted, or run away when you threaten them (because they don't
experiences fear or pain).

unless you are a left
brainer who refuses to see the big picture.

Which is exactly why you don't 'Brain Ray'.

Have you been running the microwave with the door off again and it's
fried your brain, Brain?

Cheers, T i m


You seem to be having an angry moment.


BTW, your knowledge of how seeds spread is terrible.

There are some which rely on birds/ animals consuming the fruit etc and
excreting the seed elsewhere but far from all. Plus, of course, many things
you eat the seeds etc are consumed/ cooked or otherwise rendered unsuitable
for growing.

Try germinating a salted peanut or a mashed potato.

Then, being a left brainer, you cant be expected to understand the wider
world.

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:32:11 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip


You seem to be having an angry moment.

Not very good with moods and feelings are you Brain?


BTW, your knowledge of how seeds spread is terrible.

What, fruit seeds, you know, what we were talking about?

There are some which rely on birds/ animals consuming the fruit etc and
excreting the seed elsewhere

I know, I stated that.

but far from all.

Sorry, I forgot you would have needed them *all* spelled out? Left
brainers are like that. ;-(

Plus, of course, many things
you eat the seeds etc are consumed/ cooked or otherwise rendered unsuitable
for growing.

Of course, but what percentage of the 'wild fruit trees' would that be
exactly? How many fruit trees / bushes do you have and how many do you
leave completely to nature? [1]

Try germinating a salted peanut or a mashed potato.

Well done for finding a couple of examples where both meat eaters and
vegans may impact the earth, assuming both weren't commercially farmed
etc ... but equally try bringing a lump of animal flesh back to life,
any flesh, from any animal, you know, the ones that the vegan's
*wouldn't* be killing in the first place and not feeding all that
fruit and veg to? The ones that nearly outnumber us 2:1, eat more food
and produce more waste.

Then, being a left brainer, you can’t be expected to understand the wider
world.

Aww bless. You gave it the best go you could Brain so well done for
trying (but still no cigar).

Cheers, T i m

[1] I took Mum out on the scooter the other day in a local park and we
passed an apple tree that she knew from when she lived there as a kid,
80+ years ago. There were 'loads' fallen on the ground and she hinted
at getting some but I said I'd rather they stayed where they were (inc
the ones yet to fall).

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 17:45:40 UTC+1, Radio Man wrote:
T i m wrote:

No different to someone eating an egg or chicken etc, unless you are a left
brainer who refuses to see the big picture.

maybe he's a left behind brainer.

On 09/09/2020 00:31, T i m wrote:


[1] I took Mum out on the scooter the other day in a local park

Makes a change from the dog walking anecdotes.

T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 22:32:11 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip


You seem to be having an angry moment.

Not very good with moods and feelings are you Brain?


BTW, your knowledge of how seeds spread is terrible.

What, fruit seeds, you know, what we were talking about?

There are some which rely on birds/ animals consuming the fruit etc and
excreting the seed elsewhere

I know, I stated that.

but far from all.

Sorry, I forgot you would have needed them *all* spelled out? Left
brainers are like that. ;-(

Plus, of course, many things
you eat the seeds etc are consumed/ cooked or otherwise rendered unsuitable
for growing.

Of course, but what percentage of the 'wild fruit trees' would that be
exactly? How many fruit trees / bushes do you have and how many do you
leave completely to nature? [1]

Try germinating a salted peanut or a mashed potato.

Well done for finding a couple of examples where both meat eaters and
vegans may impact the earth, assuming both weren't commercially farmed
etc ... but equally try bringing a lump of animal flesh back to life,
any flesh, from any animal, you know, the ones that the vegan's
*wouldn't* be killing in the first place and not feeding all that
fruit and veg to? The ones that nearly outnumber us 2:1, eat more food
and produce more waste.

Then, being a left brainer, you canÂ’t be expected to understand the wider
world.

Aww bless. You gave it the best go you could Brain so well done for
trying (but still no cigar).

Cheers, T i m

[1] I took Mum out on the scooter the other day in a local park and we
passed an apple tree that she knew from when she lived there as a kid,
80+ years ago. There were 'loads' fallen on the ground and she hinted
at getting some but I said I'd rather they stayed where they were (inc
the ones yet to fall).



You do know that Apple trees rarely produce fruit after 50 years, even if
well cared for. One in a park is unlikely to be cared for as an Apple tree
should.

Another of your stories shot down in flames.

On Wed, 9 Sep 2020 07:10:31 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

[1] I took Mum out on the scooter the other day in a local park and we
passed an apple tree that she knew from when she lived there as a kid,
80+ years ago. There were 'loads' fallen on the ground and she hinted
at getting some but I said I'd rather they stayed where they were (inc
the ones yet to fall).



You do know that Apple trees rarely produce fruit after 50 years, even if
well cared for.

What, every single one (given you are an expert on such things)?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...erts-core.html

One in a park is unlikely to be cared for as an Apple tree
should.

Except (if my 90 year old Mum got it right), it was in her garden and
then in other peoples gardens when there were the houses over there.

Or what if it was a child tree of the one my Mum knew, after all,
that's the points of the apples falling off isn't it?

Pruning (thinning, topping, lifting, pollarding) trees is also part of
the general care routine of the local councils and especially any
trees of special note or status.

Another of your stories shot down in flames.

And that's the only thing you can take from that? Pathetic.

So, I repeat, how many fruit trees and bushes in your garden and do
you leave all the fruit on them to nature?

Just how much of a hypocrite are you Brain?

Cheers, T i m

On Tue, 8 Sep 2020 17:30:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, 8 September 2020 17:45:40 UTC+1, Radio Man wrote:
T i m wrote:

No different to someone eating an egg or chicken etc, unless you are a left
brainer who refuses to see the big picture.

maybe he's a left behind brainer.

Yeah, if that's what it takes to *not* want to interfere with animals.

Being a vegetarian (unless a stepping stone to veganism), is like a
murderer offering to tranquillise their victim before killing them.

Cheers, T i m