On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 00:38:30 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

snip
You've admitted how you endorse the mutilation of genitals of pets for
your own pleasure.

Cite?

'Endorse', yes, because it's in the best interests of the animals
health and reduces any further suffering.

Quite, when the alternative is simply not to have pets.

Agreed. However, when there are animals that need rescuing that
already exist, then that's what we (and millions of other people who
aren't psychopaths) do.

Wouldn't there be less suffering if there wasn't the demand for pets?

Potentially (very much depending on the animal and how it's kept and
how they came to be 'companion animals').

Rescuing a stay dog that is likely to die slowly otherwise is a 'good
thing', catching and keeping a wild bird is not [1].

Cheers, T i m

[1] When I was a lad I rescued a Rock Dove that had a broken wingtip
and couldn't fly. Now I know you would have treated it humanely and
gassed it to death, of given it an electric shock and 'hoped' (maybe?)
it was unaware of it's surroundings before it was plunged into boiling
water or it's throat cut) but I'm not you, so I caught it, picked it
up and took it home.

I took it to the vet and paid him to treat the damaged wing and made
the bird a roost box at the bottom of the garden that was accessed by
a ramp that put it out of reach of predators.

The tip of the wing eventually fell off and the bird became very
friendly, would step onto my hand, sit on my shoulder and even stay
there as I walked about.At no point was he / she not free to leave or
walk away from me but he didn't.

A couple of years later a mate was round and had the bird on his hand
and then he launched it into the air, thinking it could still fly ...
and it sorta did and manage to get up on the leanto roof. It then
explored / practiced going further and further till he / she was
flying fully again. However, even though at that point he/she was
'free' he/she sill came back to the roost I made (no longer needing
the ramp) and continued to do so till we went on family holiday.

We left water and plenty of food and instructions for a neighbour to
keep them both topped up but when we came back he/she had gone.

Speaking to the lads in the workshop of a garage that was near our
house and they said 'Your pigeon was in here looking for you last
Saturday'.

So, was he/she 'a pet'? Did he/she suffer during the ~2 years I was
caring for him? Was he/she restricted from living a 'natural' life
(given the lack of flight issue)?

No, it was the right thing to do and I'm glad (for both of us) I did
it.

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 02:24:27 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 26/09/2020 00:17:59, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 23:27:52 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

snip

Admitted what precisely? That I like eating meat?

Yup,

Moron, or of short memory. I have never denied I like eating meat.

and therefore you don't actually give a fcuk about the pain,
torture, suffering

No, you would like me not to give a **** about the pain, torture and
suffering because otherwise it harms your argument and your hypocrisy.

But you don't care about all those things, when they actually exist?

The difference between you and me is I want animal welfare to improve.

By giving the person you are about to rape a pillow.

Your 'solution' is no solution when you take the life on an animal
that doesn't want to give up it's life. Full stop.

You get high on age restricted videos showing animals in pain in an
attempt to justify your imposition of your enforced veganism onto others.

Again, left in for others too see how much of a desperate and
disgusting troll you really are.

Just to highlight just how much fear and paranoia you are carrying,
did you know I can't 'enforce' veganism on anyone?

All I am doing is trying to allow people to consider what their
lifestyle choices really mean and hope they will react positively
themselves.

See, if 'most normal people', especially those who haven't had a whole
lifetime to be indoctrinated to accept a logical inconsistency (we can
kill a lamb to eat when we don't actually need to to survive, but not
hurt, let alone eat a cat or dog), watch one of the factual
documentary videos, simply covering the processes that go in behind
the scenes to produce the animal flesh they pick up and eat with not a
thought to where it came from, they are often disgusted (with the
process and themselves), they are horrified (at the process) and
typically go away and re-think their position on it all. Many have
stated how watching the likes of 'Dominion', 'Cowspiracy' or 'Land of
Hope and Glory' was sufficient to stop them eating meat (eggs and
dairy) and were happy they were now doing the right thing.

The people that watch such things and aren't revolted, aren't 'put
off' from eating meat are suffering 'cognitive dissonance', they (then
at least) understand what happens (the cognitive bit) but demonstrate
a dissonance (the ability to not link the death of a lamb and beating
a dog as being equally abhorrent).

https://ibb.co/N2zFBJh

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:43:21 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip
Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

A caveman would definitely out survive us if our technologies failed.

What's this, some actual sense for a change?

You are absolutely right for the vast majority, not only because they
wouldn't be able (physically or emotionally) able to do what they
might *need* to do to survive, but how to do it.

And once again it would demonstrate how animals are superior to us and
have evolved over millions of years to do so, knowing what they can
eat and what will poison / bite / kill them and how to best do the
things they need to survive (like getting sufficient minerals) using
(in most cases), just with what they were born with.

We can't easily eat most meat without fire and cooking (or cutting it
very thin or pulverising it), couldn't catch much without traps,
weapons or tools, and couldn't break it down into the bits we can eat
(typically just the flesh), without more tools.

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.

Cheers, T i m

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.
You and your mate still looking for dicky?

On 26/09/2020 10:47, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:43:21 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip
Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

A caveman would definitely out survive us if our technologies failed.

What's this, some actual sense for a change?

Cheap shot from a cheap ****.

You should accept that for humans and any other animal to be robust
enough to survive, they will eat anything that their physiology wants
them to consume. Forget about the conscious passionate thinking for a
moment and think instead of the numerous times in your life that you
really wanted to eat a particular foodstuff. That's your body telling
you what it needs and that stuff didn't originally come in pill form.


You are absolutely right for the vast majority, not only because they
wouldn't be able (physically or emotionally) able to do what they
might *need* to do to survive, but how to do it.

And once again it would demonstrate how animals are superior to us and
have evolved over millions of years to do so, knowing what they can
eat and what will poison / bite / kill them and how to best do the
things they need to survive (like getting sufficient minerals) using
(in most cases), just with what they were born with.

You've missed the point a bit, but that is your normal state.
So, from your vast knowledge base, can you tell me which particular
species alive today has evolved to be superior to homo sapiens?

Also, about the evolution over millions of years, did homo sapiens
spontaneously arrive on the planet or were they a part of an
evolutionary process?


We can't easily eat most meat without fire and cooking (or cutting it
very thin or pulverising it), couldn't catch much without traps,
weapons or tools, and couldn't break it down into the bits we can eat
(typically just the flesh), without more tools.

And?


Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.

NSS. However, there are many people who do know the difference.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:29:44 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:47, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:43:21 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip
Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

A caveman would definitely out survive us if our technologies failed.

What's this, some actual sense for a change?

Cheap shot from a cheap ****.

Just telling it as I see, given how much trolling you have been doing
I though it to be appropriate.

You should accept that for humans and any other animal to be robust
enough to survive, they will eat anything that their physiology wants
them to consume.

Why do you think I wouldn't have already 'accepted' that?

Forget about the conscious passionate thinking for a
moment and think instead of the numerous times in your life that you
really wanted to eat a particular foodstuff.

Ok ... ?

That's your body telling
you what it needs and that stuff didn't originally come in pill form.

Like a sausage and egg McMuffin you mean?


You are absolutely right for the vast majority, not only because they
wouldn't be able (physically or emotionally) able to do what they
might *need* to do to survive, but how to do it.

And once again it would demonstrate how animals are superior to us and
have evolved over millions of years to do so, knowing what they can
eat and what will poison / bite / kill them and how to best do the
things they need to survive (like getting sufficient minerals) using
(in most cases), just with what they were born with.

You've missed the point a bit, but that is your normal state.

Cheap shot from a cheap ****?

So, from your vast knowledge base, can you tell me which particular
species alive today has evolved to be superior to homo sapiens?

In what way are you judging 'superior', if we are comparing like for
like?

Might? We are pathetic.
Speed? We are pathetic.
Longevity? We are pathetic.
Sight? We are pathetic.
Hearing? We are pathetic.
Temperature tolerance? We are pathetic.
Underwater? We are pathetic.
In the sky? We are pathetic.
Reaction times? We are pathetic.
Memory? We are pathetic.
Long distance communication? We are pathetic.
Ability to live in harmony with nature? We are pathetic.
Being self sufficient from birth? We are pathetic.
Ability to **** up the one place we need to survive? We are brilliant.

What area specifically were you thinking of?

A chimp with it's bare hands versus us with a knife, or do you mean
someone in cammo gear, hiding up a tree and shooting a deer from 500
yards away with a rifle and a scope?

Or maybe you think that because we can design a microprocessor is all
it takes to make us 'superior' to everything else?

Also, about the evolution over millions of years, did homo sapiens
spontaneously arrive on the planet or were they a part of an
evolutionary process?

Erm, what do you think I'd say? But do you have a point?


We can't easily eat most meat without fire and cooking (or cutting it
very thin or pulverising it), couldn't catch much without traps,
weapons or tools, and couldn't break it down into the bits we can eat
(typically just the flesh), without more tools.

And?

So we aren't carnivores. Being an omnivore *doesn't* mean we can eat
everything, it just means we aren't *obligate* herbivores OR
carnivores.


Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.

NSS. However, there are many people who do know the difference.

Quite, but what percentage of today's population do you think, if we
are talking about us reverting to cavepersons (which I wasn't of
course).

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:10:45 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.

If that massages your ego Dicky ...

You and your mate still looking for dicky?

Sure, when you coming round (maybe mommy could drop you off and wait,
I'm sure you wouldn't be long ...)?

Cheers, T i m

On 26/09/2020 15:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:10:45 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.

If that massages your ego Dicky ...

You and your mate still looking for dicky?

Sure, when you coming round (maybe mommy could drop you off and wait,
I'm sure you wouldn't be long ...)?

Mommy died 28 years ago.

On 26/09/2020 15:02, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:29:44 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:47, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:43:21 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip
Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

A caveman would definitely out survive us if our technologies failed.

What's this, some actual sense for a change?

Cheap shot from a cheap ****.

Just telling it as I see, given how much trolling you have been doing
I though it to be appropriate.

You should accept that for humans and any other animal to be robust
enough to survive, they will eat anything that their physiology wants
them to consume.

Why do you think I wouldn't have already 'accepted' that?

Forget about the conscious passionate thinking for a
moment and think instead of the numerous times in your life that you
really wanted to eat a particular foodstuff.

Ok ... ?

That's your body telling
you what it needs and that stuff didn't originally come in pill form.

Like a sausage and egg McMuffin you mean?
If that's what *you* fancy right now.



You are absolutely right for the vast majority, not only because they
wouldn't be able (physically or emotionally) able to do what they
might *need* to do to survive, but how to do it.

And once again it would demonstrate how animals are superior to us and
have evolved over millions of years to do so, knowing what they can
eat and what will poison / bite / kill them and how to best do the
things they need to survive (like getting sufficient minerals) using
(in most cases), just with what they were born with.

You've missed the point a bit, but that is your normal state.

Cheap shot from a cheap ****?

So, from your vast knowledge base, can you tell me which particular
species alive today has evolved to be superior to homo sapiens?

In what way are you judging 'superior', if we are comparing like for
like?

Might? We are pathetic.
You are.

Speed? We are pathetic.
You are.

Longevity? We are pathetic.
You are.

Sight? We are pathetic.
You are.

Hearing? We are pathetic.
You are.

Temperature tolerance? We are pathetic.
You are.

Underwater? We are pathetic.
You are.

In the sky? We are pathetic.
You are.

Reaction times? We are pathetic.
You are.

Memory? We are pathetic.
You are.
Long distance communication? We are pathetic.
You are.

Ability to live in harmony with nature? We are pathetic.
You are.

Being self sufficient from birth? We are pathetic.
You are

Ability to **** up the one place we need to survive? We are brilliant.
You are trying to not be.


What area specifically were you thinking of?

A chimp with it's bare hands versus us with a knife, or do you mean
someone in cammo gear, hiding up a tree and shooting a deer from 500
yards away with a rifle and a scope?
All of your attempts to portray homo sapiens as being pathetic in
comparison to the rest of the natural world is well, pathetic.
Sure as a mammal a Cuvier's beaked whale can outperform us underwater,
but would that whale be able to outrun us on land.


Or maybe you think that because we can design a microprocessor is all
it takes to make us 'superior' to everything else?
No, it is simply our ability to adapt the environment to our needs which
gives us the edge. Sad as it is, that's a fact.


Also, about the evolution over millions of years, did homo sapiens
spontaneously arrive on the planet or were they a part of an
evolutionary process?

Erm, what do you think I'd say? But do you have a point?
We are part of the evolutionary process. We aced it, to the detriment of
everything else and ourselves.



We can't easily eat most meat without fire and cooking (or cutting it
very thin or pulverising it), couldn't catch much without traps,
weapons or tools, and couldn't break it down into the bits we can eat
(typically just the flesh), without more tools.

And?

So we aren't carnivores. Being an omnivore *doesn't* mean we can eat
everything, it just means we aren't *obligate* herbivores OR
carnivores.
It *does* mean that we will try to eat anything should the need arise.



Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.

NSS. However, there are many people who do know the difference.

Quite, but what percentage of today's population do you think, if we
are talking about us reverting to cavepersons (which I wasn't of
course).

Where did *I* say anything about us reverting to cavemen?
You brought them into the thread in an attempt to belittle meat eating
people.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 19:20:14 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 15:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:10:45 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.

If that massages your ego Dicky ...

You and your mate still looking for dicky?

Sure, when you coming round (maybe mommy could drop you off and wait,
I'm sure you wouldn't be long ...)?

Mommy died 28 years ago.

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:43:21 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip
Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

A caveman would definitely out survive us if our technologies failed.

What's this, some actual sense for a change?

You are absolutely right for the vast majority, not only because they
wouldn't be able (physically or emotionally) able to do what they
might *need* to do to survive, but how to do it.

And once again it would demonstrate how animals are superior to us and
have evolved over millions of years to do so, knowing what they can
eat and what will poison / bite / kill them and how to best do the
things they need to survive (like getting sufficient minerals) using
(in most cases), just with what they were born with.

We can't easily eat most meat without fire and cooking (or cutting it
very thin or pulverising it), couldn't catch much without traps,
weapons or tools, and couldn't break it down into the bits we can eat
(typically just the flesh), without more tools.

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.

Cheers, T i m


********.

Of the many, many types of mushrooms a relatively small number are
poisonous and even fewer will kill you. Not a huge number are that good to
eat but they wont harm you. A few are harmless to some people but not
others.

You would think a vegan would know that.

Havent you been on a course?

No, you just pontificate. You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 02:24:27 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 26/09/2020 00:17:59, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 23:27:52 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

snip

Admitted what precisely? That I like eating meat?

Yup,

Moron, or of short memory. I have never denied I like eating meat.

and therefore you don't actually give a fcuk about the pain,
torture, suffering

No, you would like me not to give a **** about the pain, torture and
suffering because otherwise it harms your argument and your hypocrisy.

But you don't care about all those things, when they actually exist?

The difference between you and me is I want animal welfare to improve.

By giving the person you are about to rape a pillow.

Your 'solution' is no solution when you take the life on an animal
that doesn't want to give up it's life. Full stop.

You get high on age restricted videos showing animals in pain in an
attempt to justify your imposition of your enforced veganism onto others.

Again, left in for others too see how much of a desperate and
disgusting troll you really are.

Just to highlight just how much fear and paranoia you are carrying,
did you know I can't 'enforce' veganism on anyone?

All I am doing is trying to allow people to consider what their
lifestyle choices really mean and hope they will react positively
themselves.

See, if 'most normal people', especially those who haven't had a whole
lifetime to be indoctrinated to accept a logical inconsistency (we can
kill a lamb to eat when we don't actually need to to survive, but not
hurt, let alone eat a cat or dog), watch one of the factual
documentary videos, simply covering the processes that go in behind
the scenes to produce the animal flesh they pick up and eat with not a
thought to where it came from, they are often disgusted (with the
process and themselves), they are horrified (at the process) and
typically go away and re-think their position on it all. Many have
stated how watching the likes of 'Dominion', 'Cowspiracy' or 'Land of
Hope and Glory' was sufficient to stop them eating meat (eggs and
dairy) and were happy they were now doing the right thing.

The people that watch such things and aren't revolted, aren't 'put
off' from eating meat are suffering 'cognitive dissonance', they (then
at least) understand what happens (the cognitive bit) but demonstrate
a dissonance (the ability to not link the death of a lamb and beating
a dog as being equally abhorrent).

https://ibb.co/N2zFBJh

Cheers, T i m



Reading that we can see why you now live alone, again.

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:55 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip for the lazy troll

Reading that

Nurse read it to you more like ...

we can see why you now live alone, again.

When did that happen then, or are you still all screwed up in the
head?

Brain Ray!

Cheers, T i m

On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:54 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.


********.

I'm sure you are about to talk some ...

Of the many, many types of mushrooms a relatively small number are
poisonous and even fewer will kill you.

That's good then. You feeling lucky, punk?

Not a huge number are that good to
eat but they won’t harm you. A few are harmless to some people but not
others.

But what is the ratio of those poisonous to us to those that aren't
ITRW, given you think you know *everything*?

How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
.... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.

Haven’t you been on a course?

Is there one then?

No, you just pontificate.

And you are just a left brained pedant that is too thick to see what I
stated was a joke, a play on words, *not* a statement of fact.

You would have thought someone supposedly as clever as you would have
learned your lesson by now? Seems you just love faceplanting?

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?

Cheers, T i m

On 26/09/2020 22:24, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 19:20:14 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 15:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:10:45 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.

If that massages your ego Dicky ...

You and your mate still looking for dicky?

Sure, when you coming round (maybe mommy could drop you off and wait,
I'm sure you wouldn't be long ...)?

Mommy died 28 years ago.

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Says the little mommy's boy who is always asking how to sort out mommy's
scooter.

On 26/09/2020 22:09, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 19:38:23 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

Ah, like the cavemen did. I really hate to think what else you still
consider to be acceptable in 2020 (well, we know some of it as you
have admitted it here).

snip pathetic trolling

At least you agree that your trolling was pathetic.


Or maybe you think that because we can design a microprocessor is all
it takes to make us 'superior' to everything else?

No, it is simply our ability to adapt the environment to our needs which
gives us the edge. Sad as it is, that's a fact.

Well done, so you agree.

I did not agree with you. I *corrected* you and you have, yet again,
twisted things around.


snip

Erm, what do you think I'd say? But do you have a point?

We are part of the evolutionary process. We aced it, to the detriment of
everything else and ourselves.

And you agree again.

I have always made that point, so am not *agreeing* with you.


snip

So we aren't carnivores. Being an omnivore *doesn't* mean we can eat
everything, it just means we aren't *obligate* herbivores OR
carnivores.

It *does* mean that we will try to eat anything should the need arise.

Yes, to survive or out of necessity, except there is no such necessity
*today* for a vast proportion of the worlds population.

It has been known for plane crash victims to become cannibals. What we
do when he *have to* isn't the same thing as doing those same things
when we don't.

We our massive intellect and contrived might over all the other
animals, we should also use that power to defend and protect.

With great power comes great responsibility. Only a coward or nutjob
would use that to his advantage.

And if we took all the live stock out of the equation, there would be
more useable land to grow useable food for humans to eat.

snip

Where did *I* say anything about us reverting to cavemen?

You brought them into the thread in an attempt to belittle meat eating
people.

You really are paranoid aren't you?

No, that's *your* perception.


You know it's 'only me' talking here (well, and all the other people
round the world who don't kill animals for pleasure or exploit them
wherever possible), no one is stopping you doing whatever your morals
see fit, and if that means slaughtering innocent animals to satisfy
your taste buds then I'll let your own conscience determine if that
makes you 'good' or not.

That would be nice. Now you can STFU.

Rest of unnecessary drivel snipped.

On Thursday, 24 September 2020 14:34:53 UTC+1, Jack Harry Teesdale wrote:
The National Trust have produced a so called 'Shame' list of 93 of their
properties linked to the Slave Trade including Winston Churchills former
home Chartwell House.

https://expressdigest.com/national-t...olonial-links/

Is there no end to their historical 'whitewashing'?

The White House (USA) was built by slave labour too.

T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:54 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.


********.

I'm sure you are about to talk some ...

Of the many, many types of mushrooms a relatively small number are
poisonous and even fewer will kill you.

That's good then. You feeling lucky, punk?

Not a huge number are that good to
eat but they wonÂ’t harm you. A few are harmless to some people but not
others.

But what is the ratio of those poisonous to us to those that aren't
ITRW, given you think you know *everything*?



How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

It depends.

For example:

A small amount of Chicken of the Woods off the wrong tree, a Yew, really
isnt a good idea.

Off the right tree, it is fine for most people. A small percentage of
people are allergic to it but the reaction tends to be unpleasant.


You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

More than you.

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.


You are bull ****ting again.

I am the one who took the trouble to learn how to forage for mushrooms.

You go to Tescos and buy some mushroom soup and think you are saving the
plant.


HavenÂ’t you been on a course?

Is there one then?

Yes, Ive been on several.



No, you just pontificate.

And you are just a left brained pedant that is too thick to see what I
stated was a joke, a play on words, *not* a statement of fact.

You would have thought someone supposedly as clever as you would have
learned your lesson by now? Seems you just love faceplanting?

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?

Cheers, T i m



You are the one who is clearly unbalanced.

Richard wrote:
On 26/09/2020 22:24, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 19:20:14 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 15:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 13:10:45 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 10:18, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 07:39:36 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip pointless OT trolling

Ooh, 'nother sore point.

If that massages your ego Dicky ...

You and your mate still looking for dicky?

Sure, when you coming round (maybe mommy could drop you off and wait,
I'm sure you wouldn't be long ...)?

Mommy died 28 years ago.

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Says the little mommy's boy who is always asking how to sort out mommy's
scooter.


His various repairs / jobs / mates etc are figments of his imagination.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:44:41 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip trolling and denial

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:50:49 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

It depends.

For example:

A small amount of Chicken of the Woods off the wrong tree, a Yew, really
isn’t a good idea.

Off the right tree, it is fine for most people. A small percentage of
people are allergic to it but the reaction tends to be unpleasant.

Interesting (for the foragers) I'm sure but wasn't actually a
question.


You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

More than you.

Oh, on mushrooms, you are probably right, I've never claimed to be an
expert on anything. But veganism and it's basic goals and principals,
you constantly *prove* you DHAFC.

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.


You are bull ****ting again.

Bwhahaha .... yeah, sure.

I am the one who took the trouble to learn how to forage for mushrooms.

And I don't forage for mushrooms and if I did, I have Google on my
phone. You were whooshed by a joke.

You go to Tesco’s and buy some mushroom soup and think you are saving the
plant.

Saving the mushroom plant? (And I know you meant 'planet'.) So, you
forage for all your mushrooms do you Brain Ray? Luckily we know you
**** in the woods so they will carry on growing there, like you do
with the fruit you grow and eat in your own garden (I *know* you do
because you haven't yet answered the question).


Haven?t you been on a course?

Is there one then?

Yes, I’ve been on several.

I'd ask for your money back. ;-(


snip

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?


You are the one who is clearly unbalanced.

Bwhahaha. You have animals raped, you have their children dragged from
them at birth (and often shot) or feed them on formula whilst *YOU*
drink the milk meant for them and until they build enough flesh to
kill and eat *by you*. You put their mothers in slavery (I notice you
have lost the anti-slavery footer, just as well, considering you
actively support slavery) for 5 years forcing them to produce 10x more
milk than the would do naturally for a child they no longer have. Once
the mothers are exhausted, at 1/5 of their natural lives, you kill
them as well. You *actively support* all this and yet think I am
unbalanced!

Why don't you watch this and really learn something about the
consequences of your denial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9sSDTbJ8WI

(don't worry, it's not the *whole* picture so shouldn't put you off
your glass of milk (meant for the child of a different species)).

Real footage from real farms documenting a real process that's going
on all the time all over the world (and worse).

Cheers, T i m

On 27/09/2020 10:03, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:44:41 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip trolling and denial

Not any of either from me, so you could have at least had the courtesy
to leave my comments in when dumping your text.

On 27/09/2020 07:50, Radio Man wrote:
Richard wrote:
On 26/09/2020 22:24, T i m wrote:

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Says the little mommy's boy who is always asking how to sort out mommy's
scooter.

His various repairs / jobs / mates etc are figments of his imagination.

I put it down to brain malfunction caused by an inadequate diet.

--
Spike

On 26/09/2020 23:16, Radio Man wrote:
T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 02:24:27 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

On 26/09/2020 00:17:59, T i m wrote:
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 23:27:52 +0100, Fredxx wrote:

snip

Admitted what precisely? That I like eating meat?

Yup,

Moron, or of short memory. I have never denied I like eating meat.

and therefore you don't actually give a fcuk about the pain,
torture, suffering

No, you would like me not to give a **** about the pain, torture and
suffering because otherwise it harms your argument and your hypocrisy.

But you don't care about all those things, when they actually exist?

The difference between you and me is I want animal welfare to improve.

By giving the person you are about to rape a pillow.

Your 'solution' is no solution when you take the life on an animal
that doesn't want to give up it's life. Full stop.

You get high on age restricted videos showing animals in pain in an
attempt to justify your imposition of your enforced veganism onto others.

Again, left in for others too see how much of a desperate and
disgusting troll you really are.

Just to highlight just how much fear and paranoia you are carrying,
did you know I can't 'enforce' veganism on anyone?

All I am doing is trying to allow people to consider what their
lifestyle choices really mean and hope they will react positively
themselves.

See, if 'most normal people', especially those who haven't had a whole
lifetime to be indoctrinated to accept a logical inconsistency (we can
kill a lamb to eat when we don't actually need to to survive, but not
hurt, let alone eat a cat or dog), watch one of the factual
documentary videos, simply covering the processes that go in behind
the scenes to produce the animal flesh they pick up and eat with not a
thought to where it came from, they are often disgusted (with the
process and themselves), they are horrified (at the process) and
typically go away and re-think their position on it all. Many have
stated how watching the likes of 'Dominion', 'Cowspiracy' or 'Land of
Hope and Glory' was sufficient to stop them eating meat (eggs and
dairy) and were happy they were now doing the right thing.

The people that watch such things and aren't revolted, aren't 'put
off' from eating meat are suffering 'cognitive dissonance', they (then
at least) understand what happens (the cognitive bit) but demonstrate
a dissonance (the ability to not link the death of a lamb and beating
a dog as being equally abhorrent).

https://ibb.co/N2zFBJh

Cheers, T i m



Reading that we can see why you now live alone, again.



oooohhh cutting brian...you just love doing that

On 26/09/2020 23:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:55 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip for the lazy troll

Reading that

Nurse read it to you more like ...

we can see why you now live alone, again.

When did that happen then, or are you still all screwed up in the
head?

Brain Ray!

Cheers, T i m

think he is...wurser than me and I'm damaged with issues....tee hee

On 27/09/2020 00:14, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:54 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.


********.

I'm sure you are about to talk some ...

Of the many, many types of mushrooms a relatively small number are
poisonous and even fewer will kill you.

That's good then. You feeling lucky, punk?

Not a huge number are that good to
eat but they wont harm you. A few are harmless to some people but not
others.

But what is the ratio of those poisonous to us to those that aren't
ITRW, given you think you know *everything*?

How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.

Havent you been on a course?

Is there one then?

No, you just pontificate.

And you are just a left brained pedant that is too thick to see what I
stated was a joke, a play on words, *not* a statement of fact.

You would have thought someone supposedly as clever as you would have
learned your lesson by now? Seems you just love faceplanting?

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?

Cheers, T i m

for one thing brian is a narsissist .....

On 27/09/2020 08:50, Radio Man wrote:
T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:54 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

Q. Are all mushrooms edible?
A. Yes, but many will kill you if you eat them.


********.

I'm sure you are about to talk some ...

Of the many, many types of mushrooms a relatively small number are
poisonous and even fewer will kill you.

That's good then. You feeling lucky, punk?

Not a huge number are that good to
eat but they wonÂ’t harm you. A few are harmless to some people but not
others.

But what is the ratio of those poisonous to us to those that aren't
ITRW, given you think you know *everything*?



How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

It depends.

For example:

A small amount of Chicken of the Woods off the wrong tree, a Yew, really
isnt a good idea.

Off the right tree, it is fine for most people. A small percentage of
people are allergic to it but the reaction tends to be unpleasant.


You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

More than you.

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.


You are bull ****ting again.

I am the one who took the trouble to learn how to forage for mushrooms.

You go to Tescos and buy some mushroom soup and think you are saving the
plant.


HavenÂ’t you been on a course?

Is there one then?

Yes, Ive been on several.



No, you just pontificate.

And you are just a left brained pedant that is too thick to see what I
stated was a joke, a play on words, *not* a statement of fact.

You would have thought someone supposedly as clever as you would have
learned your lesson by now? Seems you just love faceplanting?

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?

Cheers, T i m



You are the one who is clearly unbalanced.




tim is ok while you brian are ... well you know what you are...

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 10:42:11 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 27/09/2020 10:03, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:44:41 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip trolling and denial

Not any of either from me,

Of course it was.

so you could have at least had the courtesy
to leave my comments in when dumping your text.

Oh how I laughed, I though my trousers would never dry!!!

See, bottom line, you like the pleasure of eating animal flesh and
don't *actually* care what the animals themselves might go though
before they finally die (for eternity) to be able to pleasure your
taste buds for 5 minutes.

You think that's ok because you think we (homo sapiens) are 'superior'
to everything else, where that in itself demonstrates the arrogance of
the problem when dealing with those who think they should be allowed
to hold domain over everything else, based on some arbitrary factor.

When I highlighted just a few of the things where animals are way
*superior* to us you just tried to denigrate me, simply because you
have nothing better.

*You* with your superior skills couldn't even navigate the world
without a compass or sextant where the birds, fish and other animals
have been doing so for millions of years without any of that. Feck,
even our dog knows exactly when it's dinner time and he doesn't wear a
watch.

So your justification for all the *unnecessary* (these days and for
the vast majority) cruelty and exploitation of animals is actually /
simply because 'you think we can', not 'we can but we really
shouldn't'.

For a species that is as 'superior' as you say, we have made a pretty
good job of ****ting in our own home.

Do you think that all the so-called advancements you think we have
made are going to make a jot of difference in the end, other than
possibly being able to leave this planet, exhausted and polluted and
try to go and **** somewhere else up?

The animals have been here millions of years before us and over that
entire time, have done less damage to their homes than we have in 200.

We should respect and *protect* them. Your ego proceeds you.

https://ibb.co/RHWFbVN

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 10:04:52 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 27/09/2020 07:50, Radio Man wrote:
Richard wrote:
On 26/09/2020 22:24, T i m wrote:

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Says the little mommy's boy who is always asking how to sort out mommy's
scooter.

His various repairs / jobs / mates etc are figments of his imagination.

I put it down to brain malfunction caused by an inadequate diet.

The truth of course is everything I say about the jobs / mates I
mention here are completely true and I challenge Brain Ray to disprove
any bit of any of them.

He wouldn't of course because I know that deep down he knows himself
that he is desperate to spread FUD about me because he is feeling so
very guilty his logical inconsistency re his treatment of animals.

But I get that, I was there myself and I know how much better I feel
without that guilt on my shoulders.

And as for my diet (which is secondary to poor treatment of animals to
*me*), if the BDA and the ADA and loads of independent (eg, not
sponsored by the meat, egg and dairy industries) say the diet
typically enjoyed by vegans is good, then that's good enough for me.

Maybe if you didn't torture and kill animals you (both) might not have
to keep hiding behind socks?

Cheers, T i m

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 11:16:40 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 23:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:55 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip for the lazy troll

Reading that

Nurse read it to you more like ...

we can see why you now live alone, again.

When did that happen then, or are you still all screwed up in the
head?

Brain Ray!

Cheers, T i m

think he is...wurser than me and I'm damaged with issues....tee hee

He mate, as I said elsewhere, whilst you might be 'a character' (the
PC word for 'eccentric' or 'nutter' g), I know you are kind / good
at heart.

The likes of the Brain Ray, Spike / Burk, Fredxx and Richard trolls
[1] are being eaten up inside by both their guilt and frustration,
ironically caused by their own logical inconsistency (they happy eat a
baby sheep or piglet but not a dog) and so try to defend their 'right'
to do what they do, when what they do doesn't make sense in most of
the western / civilised world and for most people.

You and a few others have admitted you like meat ... but *haven't*
tried to defend that position. That is the difference.

Cheers, T i m

[1] I do wonder how many of them are Rod, giving the posting times,
the confrontational arguing styles, the repeated paragraphs and the
complete lack of compromise, along with the fact that he doesn't seem
to be about when they are?

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 11:17:58 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

snip

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?


for one thing brian is a narsissist .....

That's pretty evident Jim, he really seems to have lost the plot since
daughter and I met him in person at his house a while back. ;-(

But I guess when it comes to veganism, if you make people question
themselves 'of course' some are going to have difficulty with that, as
we have seen here from a conflicted and tortured minority who try to
defend the indefensible, just to protect their own ego. ;-(

So, as they struggle to deal with that, flailing about and making ****
up, simply because they are in (mental) pain and have nowhere else to
go. ;-(

Cheers, T i m

On 27/09/2020 11:57, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 10:04:52 +0000, Spike
wrote:

On 27/09/2020 07:50, Radio Man wrote:
Richard wrote:
On 26/09/2020 22:24, T i m wrote:

Even more surprising you haven't grown up yet then.

Says the little mommy's boy who is always asking how to sort out mommy's
scooter.

His various repairs / jobs / mates etc are figments of his imagination.

I put it down to brain malfunction caused by an inadequate diet.

The truth of course is everything I say about the jobs / mates I
mention here are completely true and I challenge Brain Ray to disprove
any bit of any of them.

He wouldn't of course because I know that deep down he knows himself
that he is desperate to spread FUD about me because he is feeling so
very guilty his logical inconsistency re his treatment of animals.

But I get that, I was there myself and I know how much better I feel
without that guilt on my shoulders.

And as for my diet (which is secondary to poor treatment of animals to
*me*), if the BDA and the ADA and loads of independent (eg, not
sponsored by the meat, egg and dairy industries) say the diet
typically enjoyed by vegans is good, then that's good enough for me.

Maybe if you didn't torture and kill animals you (both) might not have
to keep hiding behind socks?

Cheers, T i m

brian is just nasty

On 27/09/2020 12:19, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 11:16:40 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

On 26/09/2020 23:49, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 26 Sep 2020 22:16:55 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip for the lazy troll

Reading that

Nurse read it to you more like ...

we can see why you now live alone, again.

When did that happen then, or are you still all screwed up in the
head?

Brain Ray!

Cheers, T i m

think he is...wurser than me and I'm damaged with issues....tee hee

He mate, as I said elsewhere, whilst you might be 'a character' (the
PC word for 'eccentric' or 'nutter' g), I know you are kind / good
at heart.

The likes of the Brain Ray, Spike / Burk, Fredxx and Richard trolls
[1] are being eaten up inside by both their guilt and frustration,
ironically caused by their own logical inconsistency (they happy eat a
baby sheep or piglet but not a dog) and so try to defend their 'right'
to do what they do, when what they do doesn't make sense in most of
the western / civilised world and for most people.

You and a few others have admitted you like meat ... but *haven't*
tried to defend that position. That is the difference.

Cheers, T i m

[1] I do wonder how many of them are Rod, giving the posting times,
the confrontational arguing styles, the repeated paragraphs and the
complete lack of compromise, along with the fact that he doesn't seem
to be about when they are?

just had a mcds double cheese burger....first for six months it was
great,,,,

On 27/09/2020 12:29, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 11:17:58 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

snip

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?


for one thing brian is a narsissist .....

That's pretty evident Jim, he really seems to have lost the plot since
daughter and I met him in person at his house a while back. ;-(

ONG you didn't did you ?....

On 27/09/2020 11:48, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 10:42:11 +0100, Richard
wrote:

On 27/09/2020 10:03, T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:44:41 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip trolling and denial

Not any of either from me,

Of course it was.

so you could have at least had the courtesy
to leave my comments in when dumping your text.

Oh how I laughed, I though my trousers would never dry!!!

Don't fret. Mommy will be along on her scooter to comfort you sometime soon.


See, bottom line, you like the pleasure of eating animal flesh and
don't *actually* care what the animals themselves might go though
before they finally die (for eternity) to be able to pleasure your
taste buds for 5 minutes.

Yep. Note. The ****ers will die eventually, nothing lives forever.
Anyway, by eating something, I am merely converting it's state. And it's
a good thing that it will die for eternity (don't worry too much about
that). Would be ****ing awkward if those tomatoes, cucumbers and lettuce
suddenly burst into life after eating them.

https://www.nature.com/scitable/know...mass-17395478/


You think that's ok because you think we (homo sapiens) are 'superior'
to everything else, where that in itself demonstrates the arrogance of
the problem when dealing with those who think they should be allowed
to hold domain over everything else, based on some arbitrary factor.

Again Tim, you have *not* been paying attention. ****, is there any
chance that your mommy could give you a slap for me?
I don't *think* that we are superior, we have got to where we are
because evolution got us there. It is what it is.


When I highlighted just a few of the things where animals are way
*superior* to us you just tried to denigrate me, simply because you
have nothing better.

I will humour you, although the urge is to slap you silly.
What is the point of a long list of things that a specific animal can do
better than us?
At the end of the day, we are able to defeat any of them. Can that eagle
with it's better than us vision (though not at every level) swim as fast
as I can? If you are unable to comprehend the stupidity of your
comparison list, the fault is yours not mine.


*You* with your superior skills couldn't even navigate the world
without a compass or sextant where the birds, fish and other animals
have been doing so for millions of years without any of that. Feck,
even our dog knows exactly when it's dinner time and he doesn't wear a
watch.

Your point is? Well, there really isn't one as humans have overcome
their limitations through use of a superior intellectual capacity. Even
you are smarter than an albatross.

Your dog knows when it's dinner time because it has a human getting it's
dinner. Admittedly, it could have chosen better if it had a choice of owner.


So your justification for all the *unnecessary* (these days and for
the vast majority) cruelty and exploitation of animals is actually /
simply because 'you think we can', not 'we can but we really
shouldn't'.

Yep. I am actually devouring every living thing on the planet. ****, I
just swallow 'em live 'cos I know that they will die for eternity.


For a species that is as 'superior' as you say, we have made a pretty
good job of ****ting in our own home.

We indeed have. I can **** in my home and flush it down the sewer. I
hope you have similar arrangements.


Do you think that all the so-called advancements you think we have
made are going to make a jot of difference in the end, other than
possibly being able to leave this planet, exhausted and polluted and
try to go and **** somewhere else up?

At the rate we're going, lots of people are going to die along with a
whole bunch of other lifeforms. Can't undo what's been done, and as good
as I am, I didn't do it all. Hopefully we will never get to the stage
where we can populate another planet.


The animals have been here millions of years before us and over that
entire time, have done less damage to their homes than we have in 200.

Way back in this thread, I asked:
q
Also, about the evolution over millions of years, did homo sapiens
spontaneously arrive on the planet or were they a part of an
evolutionary process?
/q
Your response:
q
Erm, what do you think I'd say? But do you have a point?
/q

At the time I didn't answer the first part of your question, but, most
people here would expect you to come up with brain handedness or some
other such stuff. What would you have said?

Second part, yes, I have a point. We are part of the millions of years
of evolutionary process. Get over it.


We should respect and *protect* them. Your ego proceeds you.

I respect any form of wildlife far more than I respect religious
zealots. Indeed I respect carrots and cabbages more that religious
zealots. Bacteria command more respect, I even host the buggers in and
on my body, than religious zealots. In order to protect them, well,
that's a tough call. There is only one of me and a whole ****ing planet
covered in lifeforms. Loads of those lifeforms consume others. I cannot
protect them all.

Question. How come Jehovas Witnesses can take a hint, but vegans can't?

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 12:38:34 +0100, "Jim GM4 DHJ ..."
wrote:

snip

for one thing brian is a narsissist .....

That's pretty evident Jim, he really seems to have lost the plot since
daughter and I met him in person at his house a while back. ;-(

ONG you didn't did you ?....

Yup and as I said, he seemed ok *then*. Maybe it was the meds he was
on at the time were actually working. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 11:17:58 +0100, "Jim GM4DHJ ..."
wrote:

snip

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?


for one thing brian is a narsissist .....

That's pretty evident Jim, he really seems to have lost the plot since
daughter and I met him in person at his house a while back. ;-(




Weve never met. You certainly havent been to my house.

T i m wrote:
On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 07:50:49 -0000 (UTC), Radio Man
wrote:

snip

How many poisonous ones do you need to eat to not be able to eat any
more?

It depends.

For example:

A small amount of Chicken of the Woods off the wrong tree, a Yew, really
isnÂ’t a good idea.

Off the right tree, it is fine for most people. A small percentage of
people are allergic to it but the reaction tends to be unpleasant.

Interesting (for the foragers) I'm sure but wasn't actually a
question.


You would think a vegan would know that.

Ah and so something else you don't have a fcuking clue about!

More than you.

Oh, on mushrooms, you are probably right, I've never claimed to be an
expert on anything. But veganism and it's basic goals and principals,
you constantly *prove* you DHAFC.

See, veganism isn't all about expertise in anything (sorry you are
petrified by the thought that it is) but people who simply don't think
it's *ok* to rape, torture, kill, eat and exploit animals like you do
... and so they don't. And that's it, well, along with the
scientifically proven facts of 20% of the greenhouse gasses coming
from live stock (so because of you) and thousands of square miles of
the estuaries and oceans that are polluted by livestock waste (so
because of you again), plus all the wasted food and B12 supplements
etc, etc, etc.

But you don't care about any of that, because you are so selfish you
value your own taste buds over anything else. You defend your position
of logical inconsistency and denial because you don't want to admit
then face the truth.


You are bull ****ting again.

Bwhahaha .... yeah, sure.

I am the one who took the trouble to learn how to forage for mushrooms.

And I don't forage for mushrooms and if I did, I have Google on my
phone. You were whooshed by a joke.

You go to TescoÂ’s and buy some mushroom soup and think you are saving the
plant.

Saving the mushroom plant? (And I know you meant 'planet'.) So, you
forage for all your mushrooms do you Brain Ray? Luckily we know you
**** in the woods so they will carry on growing there, like you do
with the fruit you grow and eat in your own garden (I *know* you do
because you haven't yet answered the question).


Haven?t you been on a course?

Is there one then?

Yes, IÂ’ve been on several.

I'd ask for your money back. ;-(


snip

You probably buy a tin of mushroom soup in Tesco
and think you are saving the planet.

https://ibb.co/6HdNjMj

What *is* actually wrong with you? Have the doctors told you yet?


You are the one who is clearly unbalanced.

Bwhahaha. You have animals raped, you have their children dragged from
them at birth (and often shot) or feed them on formula whilst *YOU*
drink the milk meant for them and until they build enough flesh to
kill and eat *by you*. You put their mothers in slavery (I notice you
have lost the anti-slavery footer, just as well, considering you
actively support slavery) for 5 years forcing them to produce 10x more
milk than the would do naturally for a child they no longer have. Once
the mothers are exhausted, at 1/5 of their natural lives, you kill
them as well. You *actively support* all this and yet think I am
unbalanced!

Why don't you watch this and really learn something about the
consequences of your denial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9sSDTbJ8WI

(don't worry, it's not the *whole* picture so shouldn't put you off
your glass of milk (meant for the child of a different species)).

Real footage from real farms documenting a real process that's going
on all the time all over the world (and worse).

Cheers, T i m


You do turn nasty when someone shows you up.

I grow mushrooms by the way. One of the easiest crops. As well as foraging
for them. If you are ever up my way I could show you if you werent such a
mental case.

On Sun, 27 Sep 2020 12:52:24 +0100, Richard
wrote:

snip

See, bottom line, you like the pleasure of eating animal flesh and
don't *actually* care what the animals themselves might go though
before they finally die (for eternity) to be able to pleasure your
taste buds for 5 minutes.

Yep. Note. The ****ers will die eventually, nothing lives forever.

But 1 instead of their 'natural' 25 years isn't really 'a life' is it?

snip trolling bs

You think that's ok because you think we (homo sapiens) are 'superior'
to everything else, where that in itself demonstrates the arrogance of
the problem when dealing with those who think they should be allowed
to hold domain over everything else, based on some arbitrary factor.

Again Tim, you have *not* been paying attention.

The chances are I have been paying more attention in my sleep than you
could fully conscious (if that actually happens).

snip childish trolling

I don't *think* that we are superior, we have got to where we are
because evolution got us there.

So you do *think* we are superior but only by your selective
definition, when across the board we are *inferior* to many other
species.

It is what it is.

No, it is what we then allow ourselves to do with it.

"With great power comes great responsibility"


When I highlighted just a few of the things where animals are way
*superior* to us you just tried to denigrate me, simply because you
have nothing better.

I will humour you, although the urge is to slap you silly.

You could give it a try ...

What is the point of a long list of things that a specific animal can do
better than us?

It wasn't 'a specific animal' it was 'animals' (of which we are just
one).

If you are very selective re your criteria than you could put *any*
animal at the top of the class. Very rarely would we be at the top of
any of them (if any).

At the end of the day, we are able to defeat any of them.

Ah, so 'might is right' is your deciding characteristic. What when all
the cows turn on us and we are out of bullets, how will you defeat
them then?

Can that eagle
with it's better than us vision (though not at every level) swim as fast
as I can?

Stupid ****.

If you are unable to comprehend the stupidity of your
comparison list, the fault is yours not mine.

It's not my fault you are a desperate, pathetic and stupid troll.


*You* with your superior skills couldn't even navigate the world
without a compass or sextant where the birds, fish and other animals
have been doing so for millions of years without any of that. Feck,
even our dog knows exactly when it's dinner time and he doesn't wear a
watch.

Your point is?

One that is bound to whoosh you.

Well, there really isn't one as humans have overcome
their limitations through use of a superior intellectual capacity.

Yes, to kill each other and pollute their own home. Well done them.

Even
you are smarter than an albatross.

And you are thicker than even most normal trolls.

Your dog knows when it's dinner time because it has a human getting it's
dinner.

I think this is part of the problem, you are still sitting up in that
loft with the rocking chair aren't you. You really should get out
more.

The point was that the dog knows what time it is without any external
time-keeping tools, something we can't do. It doesn't matter what or
why that particular time became relevant.

Admittedly, it could have chosen better if it had a choice of owner.

I'm sure our daughter would be distraught at your opinion ... (NOT!).


So your justification for all the *unnecessary* (these days and for
the vast majority) cruelty and exploitation of animals is actually /
simply because 'you think we can', not 'we can but we really
shouldn't'.

Yep. I am actually devouring every living thing on the planet. ****, I
just swallow 'em live 'cos I know that they will die for eternity.

You have really lost it now haven't you.


For a species that is as 'superior' as you say, we have made a pretty
good job of ****ting in our own home.

We indeed have. I can **** in my home and flush it down the sewer. I
hope you have similar arrangements.

Whoosh. You left brainers never did get the idea of an analogy or
indirect reference did you.


Do you think that all the so-called advancements you think we have
made are going to make a jot of difference in the end, other than
possibly being able to leave this planet, exhausted and polluted and
try to go and **** somewhere else up?

At the rate we're going, lots of people are going to die along with a
whole bunch of other lifeforms.

And far fewer would die if we moved more towards a plan-based diet.

Can't undo what's been done, and as good
as I am, I didn't do it all.

Whoosh. You are part of the problem not the solution though and if you
don't feel you can play a positive part, why are you even trying to
defend that path here?

Hopefully we will never get to the stage
where we can populate another planet.

Agreed. It would be a shame to **** somewhere up like we have here.


The animals have been here millions of years before us and over that
entire time, have done less damage to their homes than we have in 200.

Way back in this thread, I asked:
q
Also, about the evolution over millions of years, did homo sapiens
spontaneously arrive on the planet or were they a part of an
evolutionary process?
/q
Your response:
q
Erm, what do you think I'd say? But do you have a point?
/q

At the time I didn't answer the first part of your question, but, most
people here would expect you to come up with brain handedness or some
other such stuff. What would you have said?

The same now as then, wtf are you after? I'm an atheist if that
answers your question?

Second part, yes, I have a point. We are part of the millions of years
of evolutionary process. Get over it.

I know, and?


We should respect and *protect* them. Your ego proceeds you.

I respect any form of wildlife far more than I respect religious
zealots.

Likewise, except you don't (therefore) actually respect wildlife do
you. (and that's not a question obviously).

Indeed I respect carrots and cabbages more that religious
zealots.

Likewise.

Bacteria command more respect, I even host the buggers in and
on my body, than religious zealots.

Snap.

In order to protect them, well,
that's a tough call.

Maybe, however, we can do a very simple thing to protect a vast number
of them every day.

There is only one of me and a whole ****ing planet
covered in lifeforms.

Thank ****.

Loads of those lifeforms consume others.

Because they *HAVE TO*. They neither have the choice or opportunity to
do anything else (well, that's not completely true but way above your
comprehension skills).

I cannot
protect them all.

No one is asking you to, we would just ask you to not kill the ones
you don't need to.

Question. How come Jehovas Witnesses can take a hint, but vegans can't?

Pass? Are they all about protecting the unnecessary pain and suffering
inflicted on innocent animals for a wholly real world / practical
reason? A reason that no one has had to tell them because it's
blatantly obvious that's what should happen?

Cheers, T i m