Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 11:06, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 09:21, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 06/06/2021 19:06, T i m wrote: There is enough arable land to grow enough food to feed the entire world population 1.5x over. The problem is the inefficient use of land for subsistence farming. That is *another* problem yes, but not to be conflated with the waste of resources (land, feed, water) and the pollution involved in keeping more livestock than people on the same small rock. Subsistence farming *is* a waste of resources. Irrelevant when people don't have the choice. It's still a waste of resources whether people choose subsistence farming or are forced into it. Where they do, moving to a plant based solution is the only way forward. .....resulting in stunted growth and low intelligence. -- Spike |
#82
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 11:03, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 09:04, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 06/06/2021 18:11, T i m wrote: alan_m wrote: Where I'm currently staying I can see very high hillsides with fields growing grass and are full of sheep. I wonder what was there before the grass? [The] Chances are [that the] trees [there] [were] absorbing [the] CO2, something we are going back to in many places. Before the trees, there was a glacier about a km thick, but 'global warming' some tens of thousands of years before the Industrial Age, got rid of it. Shouldn't we go back to those times instead, as interglacial warm periods are quite short when compared to the glacials? Thanks for yet another irrelevant history lesson outside the period of relevance. It's *all* relevant to the land in question. But not to our current use or restoration to a 'realistic' timescale level of bio-diversity for the purposes of a sensible discussion. Now comes T i m ' s qualifiers to shore up his argument... "...current use... ...realistic time-scale... ...level of bio-diversity... ...sensible discussion..." ....none of which were previously mentioned. -- Spike |
#83
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 09:07, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: T i m prefers 'Plant Pioneers', [meat free chicken-style pieces]. Yes, they are pretty good and we had half a bag between us yesterday in a large salad wraps. You make them sound like Frankenfoods. But I don't 'prefer' them over many other alternatives, with different options providing better solutions in different circumstances. Waffle. -- Spike |
#84
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 10:20, Spike wrote:
On 07/06/2021 09:16, T i m wrote: Not if you've been conditioned to add a thin, cold gruel to your mug of tea, both of the ingredients of which came by ship. WTF are you talking about now? Any chance you could stay on some sort of logical / linear track or you will further expose yourself as a lunatic troll! There's me thinking you were supporting the recent post on the alleged environmental damage cause by shipping. Was that a different T i m ? And answer came there none... -- Spike |
#85
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 09:19, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 06/06/2021 19:40, T i m wrote: ALL the medial health practitioners recommend you cut down on meat and increase the consumption of fruit, veg, nuts etc. At one time ALL [on T i m ' s scale] medical practitioners recommended smoking as it had a mild antiseptic effect and so warded off colds and flu. Yup, and then we learned better and that's where we are now re meat, eggs and dairy re human heath and it's negative impact on the environment. And we will learn better from this, too. In fact, it's already started - we now know that vegan diets result in stunted growth and lowered intelligence, and it seems they may be banned for children and pets. We are slowly getting there, no thanks to you - you're rather similar in manner to the cognitive-dissonant smoker of yesteryear. -- Spike |
#86
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote:
Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. -- Spike |
#87
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 07/06/2021 17:39, T i m wrote:
On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 17:26:44 +0100, Andrew wrote: snip Acceptable if they are also re-wilding and putting less destructive demand on the land? Are you joking ?. They are paid by the taxpayer to keep Highland coos, a few sheep and possibly one or two pigs. Yes, 'subsistence. And not for pets because in that part of the world you cannot grow crops and survive. But you don't need to if you are getting grants for you to re-wild and sensitively 'manage' the environment? And they do have shops in Scotland now you know? ;-) Cheers, T i m You should visit some of these crofts and you might be amazed how far you have to drive your diesel vehicle to get there, and how far they have to drive to get to a 'shop'. Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? |
#88
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Andrew wrote: On 07/06/2021 17:39, T i m wrote: On Mon, 7 Jun 2021 17:26:44 +0100, Andrew wrote: snip Acceptable if they are also re-wilding and putting less destructive demand on the land? Are you joking ?. They are paid by the taxpayer to keep Highland coos, a few sheep and possibly one or two pigs. Yes, 'subsistence. And not for pets because in that part of the world you cannot grow crops and survive. But you don't need to if you are getting grants for you to re-wild and sensitively 'manage' the environment? And they do have shops in Scotland now you know? ;-) Cheers, T i m You should visit some of these crofts and you might be amazed how far you have to drive your diesel vehicle to get there, and how far they have to drive to get to a 'shop'. Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Last week there was programme on North Uist where a lot of people had won money on the PostCode Lottery. Asked what sort of holiday they might take, having won a 5 figure sume, one couple thought they might like to go to Inverness. -- from KT24 in Surrey, England "I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle |
#89
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 12:37, charles wrote:
Last week there was programme on North Uist where a lot of people had won money on the PostCode Lottery. Asked what sort of holiday they might take, having won a 5 figure sume, one couple thought they might like to go to Inverness. I'd probably be like that! Bill |
#90
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:50:24 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) but you can't tell me why you have chosen to not eat cows or sheep? Cheers, T i m |
#91
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:48:55 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 07/06/2021 11:03, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 09:04, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 06/06/2021 18:11, T i m wrote: alan_m wrote: Where I'm currently staying I can see very high hillsides with fields growing grass and are full of sheep. I wonder what was there before the grass? [The] Chances are [that the] trees [there] [were] absorbing [the] CO2, something we are going back to in many places. Before the trees, there was a glacier about a km thick, but 'global warming' some tens of thousands of years before the Industrial Age, got rid of it. Shouldn't we go back to those times instead, as interglacial warm periods are quite short when compared to the glacials? Thanks for yet another irrelevant history lesson outside the period of relevance. It's *all* relevant to the land in question. But not to our current use or restoration to a 'realistic' timescale level of bio-diversity for the purposes of a sensible discussion. Now comes T i m ' s qualifiers to shore up his argument... "...current use... ...realistic time-scale... ...level of bio-diversity... ...sensible discussion..." ...none of which were previously mentioned. Do I *really* have to mention *every little and obvious thing*, *every time* I cover the subject in general, just to placate the ignorant / left brainers? Oh, no need to answer that because it's obvious (well, to non troll / left brainers). It's the same when mentioning anything when you *try* to use your distraction techniques to attempt to justify something ... like 'we have drunk cows milk for thousands of years' like that in any way justifies our continuing to drink it NOW. There are *loads* of things we used to do that we no longer do (thank goodness) and so all of them were likely to be justified by the likes of you at the time when the likes of me had already opposed them. So yes, a lot of the world was once covered in ice bit that has no bearing whatsoever in a conversation of how most of the UK (in particular) was once covered in trees (so that sets the starting timeline) and now there are far fewer. We might want / need to go back to the time where there were loads of trees but the chances are we wouldn't want to go back to the time when we were covered in ice. Cheers, T i m |
#92
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:49:10 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 07/06/2021 09:07, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: T i m prefers 'Plant Pioneers', [meat free chicken-style pieces]. Yes, they are pretty good and we had half a bag between us yesterday in a large salad wraps. You make them sound like Frankenfoods. NO, you want them to sound like that to =try to offset your desire to cause pain and suffering to (a bizarre subset) of animals. But I don't 'prefer' them over many other alternatives, with different options providing better solutions in different circumstances. Waffle. Complicated isn't it, all this general talk, when you are a left brainer. So, Spuke, WHY don't you eat cows and sheep? Cheers, T i m |
#93
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 14:09, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: Now comes T i m ' s qualifiers to shore up his argument... "...current use... ...realistic time-scale... ...level of bio-diversity... ...sensible discussion..." ...none of which were previously mentioned. Do I *really* have to mention *every little and obvious thing*, *every time* I cover the subject in general, just to placate the ignorant / left brainers? Oh, no need to answer that because it's obvious (well, to non troll / left brainers). It's unacceptable to shift the grounds of a discussion you started. It's the same when mentioning anything when you *try* to use your distraction techniques to attempt to justify something ... like 'we have drunk cows milk for thousands of years' like that in any way justifies our continuing to drink it NOW. Waffle. There are *loads* of things we used to do that we no longer do (thank goodness) and so all of them were likely to be justified by the likes of you at the time when the likes of me had already opposed them. Waffle. So yes, a lot of the world was once covered in ice bit that has no bearing whatsoever in a conversation of how most of the UK (in particular) was once covered in trees (so that sets the starting timeline) There was *no* starting timeline in your unbounded argument. It's only now that you've realised your error and are back-pedalling furiously. and now there are far fewer. Unimportant on a geologic scale. We might want / need to go back to the time where there were loads of trees but the chances are we wouldn't want to go back to the time when we were covered in ice. So you say, but it's the planet's natural condition. The warm bits are the anomaly. -- Spike |
#94
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 14:11, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 09:07, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: T i m prefers 'Plant Pioneers', [meat free chicken-style pieces]. Yes, they are pretty good and we had half a bag between us yesterday in a large salad wraps. You make them sound like Frankenfoods. NO, you want them to sound like that to =try to offset your desire to cause pain and suffering to (a bizarre subset) of animals. But I don't 'prefer' them over many other alternatives, with different options providing better solutions in different circumstances. Waffle. Complicated isn't it, all this general talk, when you are a left brainer. So, Spuke, WHY don't you eat cows and sheep? groan Freedom of choice - something that veganists would like to ban. -- Spike |
#95
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:11:23 +0100, Andrew
wrote: snip And they do have shops in Scotland now you know? ;-) You should visit some of these crofts and you might be amazed how far you have to drive your diesel vehicle to get there, I have, and it was on a petrol motorcycle (doing 50 mpg). ;-) and how far they have to drive to get to a 'shop'. Ah yes, and for all those *choosing* to move there or even stay there, it's part of the cost of living there. eg. We *choose* to holiday in the country but we accept that it's not as convenient as living a walk from everything. Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Grants. Keep up ... https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants You either leave it to nature (costs nothing) or pay someone who is stuck there [1] to look after it for us all. Cheers, T i m [1] Many who were born in the back of beyond don't want to live in isolation in shift and mud all their lives and move to the towns. p.s. I saw on Countryfile where they were offering old farmers money to **** off to allow new people in (who would have a more 'forward thinking' attitude towards the environment). |
#96
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:27:20 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip So, Spuke, WHY don't you eat cows and sheep? groan Freedom of choice - snip bs Yes, I know you have the 'freedom of choice' but that isn't an answer to *why / only* sheep and cows that you don't eat? There must be *some* sort of rational reason, even if it's only part of your general logical inconsistency and speciesism? I mean, if when you were a child, happily stamping on chickens and then were traumatised by your Dad being killed by a cow (when trying to kill 'it' say) and your Mum killed by a sheep (when trying to do the same), I would have thought you would *want* to kill cows and sheep and the best / easiest / legal way to do that is to buy and eat their flesh? (Ok, someone else actually kills them for you but you are still causing their deaths eh). Or maybe the trauma of recalling all that is why you can't answer such a simple and straightforward question? Cheers, T i m |
#97
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:26:24 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 08/06/2021 14:09, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: Now comes T i m ' s qualifiers to shore up his argument... "...current use... ...realistic time-scale... ...level of bio-diversity... ...sensible discussion..." ...none of which were previously mentioned. Do I *really* have to mention *every little and obvious thing*, *every time* I cover the subject in general, just to placate the ignorant / left brainers? Oh, no need to answer that because it's obvious (well, to non troll / left brainers). It's unacceptable to shift the grounds of a discussion you started. Wasn't shifting any grounds. You simply couldn't predict what would be considered by most a reasonable bounds for the discussion. It's the same when mentioning anything when you *try* to use your distraction techniques to attempt to justify something ... like 'we have drunk cows milk for thousands of years' like that in any way justifies our continuing to drink it NOW. Waffle. Relevant point to a right brainer. There are *loads* of things we used to do that we no longer do (thank goodness) and so all of them were likely to be justified by the likes of you at the time when the likes of me had already opposed them. Waffle. Relevant point to a right brainer. So yes, a lot of the world was once covered in ice bit that has no bearing whatsoever in a conversation of how most of the UK (in particular) was once covered in trees (so that sets the starting timeline) There was *no* starting timeline in your unbounded argument. It's only now that you've realised your error and are back-pedalling furiously. and now there are far fewer. Unimportant on a geologic scale. Relevant to the timescale likely to be in discussion. If it wasn't we would be throwing dinosaurs into the discussion and you haven't (yet). We might want / need to go back to the time where there were loads of trees but the chances are we wouldn't want to go back to the time when we were covered in ice. So you say, but it's the planet's natural condition. The warm bits are the anomaly. Again, not when compared to our habitation of the world as we know and deal with it it isn't. Cheers, T i m |
#98
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 14:59, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 08:50:24 +0000, Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) but you can't tell me why you have chosen to not eat cows or sheep? Many of us post to correct your lies and fallacious claims. No harassment intended. If you stopped posting lies you wouldn't feel harassed. |
#99
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 15:10, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: snip So, Spuke, WHY don't you eat cows and sheep? groan Freedom of choice - snip bs Yes, I know you have the 'freedom of choice' but that isn't an answer to *why / only* sheep and cows that you don't eat? There must be *some* sort of rational reason, even if it's only part of your general logical inconsistency and speciesism? I mean, if when you were a child, happily stamping on chickens and then were traumatised by your Dad being killed by a cow (when trying to kill 'it' say) and your Mum killed by a sheep (when trying to do the same), I would have thought you would *want* to kill cows and sheep and the best / easiest / legal way to do that is to buy and eat their flesh? (Ok, someone else actually kills them for you but you are still causing their deaths eh). Or maybe the trauma of recalling all that is why you can't answer such a simple and straightforward question? Get help for your problem, or at least start eating meat. -- Spike |
#100
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 13:59, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) I never mentioned your wife. But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? -- Spike |
#101
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 08/06/2021 15:51, T i m wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:11:23 +0100, Andrew wrote: snip And they do have shops in Scotland now you know? ;-) You should visit some of these crofts and you might be amazed how far you have to drive your diesel vehicle to get there, I have, and it was on a petrol motorcycle (doing 50 mpg). ;-) and how far they have to drive to get to a 'shop'. Ah yes, and for all those *choosing* to move there or even stay there, it's part of the cost of living there. eg. We *choose* to holiday in the country but we accept that it's not as convenient as living a walk from everything. Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Grants. Keep up ... You mean TAXES https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants You either leave it to nature (costs nothing) or pay someone who is stuck there [1] to look after it for us all. If ypu are going to use (mostly) English taxes to pay those grants, then they might as well use animals to take care of the management (which they do, very effectively) and a useful byproduct is food for the people who live there to make sure the animals don't escape. What's more, now we have escaped the EU we could ditch all those idiotic regulations that forced the closure of many abbatoirs and resulted in animals being transported longer distances. Cheers, T i m [1] Many who were born in the back of beyond don't want to live in isolation in shift and mud all their lives and move to the towns. p.s. I saw on Countryfile where they were offering old farmers money to **** off to allow new people in (who would have a more 'forward thinking' attitude towards the environment). Or not, or the same. What makes you think that existing farmers don't care about the environment ?. From what I can see it is the regular invasion of (younger) townies, damaging dry-stone walls, and leaving crap (literally), single-use plastic and bbqs everywhere who care the least about the environment. |
#102
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:06:40 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip Or maybe the trauma of recalling all that is why you can't answer such a simple and straightforward question? Get help for your problem, or at least start eating meat. The person needing help is the one incapable of answering a simple question re why they made a specific choice. I believe it's because you are lying or have something to hide as even someone as thick as you must know whey they have *chosen* (implying a decision) to not eat sheep or cows but eat everything else. Cheers, T i m |
#103
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:12:06 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 08/06/2021 13:59, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) I never mentioned your wife. Liar. As soon as I mentioned my wife had arthritis previously you mention the link to tomatoes (or some other troll, they all smell the same to me). But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? Nope, she has made a choice but unlike your *choice* to (allegedly) not eat sheep or cows, she can vocalise a reason why. I'm sure whatever power is prohibiting you from answering such a simple question would forgive you if it was the truth? Cheers, T i m |
#104
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 09:24:50 +0100, Andrew
wrote: snip Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Grants. Keep up ... You mean TAXES Strange, that link says it's grants that *pay* the people to do it? https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants You either leave it to nature (costs nothing) or pay someone who is stuck there [1] to look after it for us all. If ypu are going to use (mostly) English taxes to pay those grants, Obscure statement 1. then they might as well use animals to take care of the management (which they do, very effectively) and a useful byproduct is food for the people who live there to make sure the animals don't escape. Or not. A much kinder way than exploiting animals is to just let it rewild like it would have been before we turned up. Yes, ideally those people would just **** off and stop being a burden on others trying to have their subsistence life when the world won't support that number of people that way. What's more, now we have escaped the EU we could ditch all those idiotic regulations that forced the closure of many abbatoirs and resulted in animals being transported longer distances. Or, we could stop the idiotic approach of considering sentient beings as food when we don't need to? Cheers, T i m [1] Many who were born in the back of beyond don't want to live in isolation in shift and mud all their lives and move to the towns. p.s. I saw on Countryfile where they were offering old farmers money to **** off to allow new people in (who would have a more 'forward thinking' attitude towards the environment). Or not, or the same. What makes you think that existing farmers don't care about the environment ?. I didn't, the Countryfile report on what the government were doing did. Existing long term farmers are similar to existing long term carnists in that they are lest likely to be sufficiently forward thinking to be willing to change. They are 'more likely' to be 'stuck in their ways'. From what I can see it is the regular invasion of (younger) townies, damaging dry-stone walls, and leaving crap (literally), single-use plastic and bbqs everywhere who care the least about the environment. Ah, you are now trying to conflate inconsiderate 'visitors' to the country with people choosing to live there. It would be like saying 'bloody countryfolk driving their tractors / Series Landrovers on the public highways, causing all sorts delays to townies in proper cars and dropping their mud everywhere ... (that the taxpayer has to pay to clean up).' Cheers, T i m |
#105
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 09:52, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: Or maybe the trauma of recalling all that is why you can't answer such a simple and straightforward question? Get help for your problem, or at least start eating meat. The person needing help is the one incapable of answering a simple question re why they made a specific choice. I believe it's because you are lying or have something to hide as even someone as thick as you must know whey they have *chosen* (implying a decision) to not eat sheep or cows but eat everything else. I told you in a previous post about how choices can be influenced, destroying the argument you were making about the issue. I knew you wouldn't understand it, but it had to be said, even though you are now going around the cycle yet again. Your description of your family sitting around the table (not necessarily literally) and saying to you "Well, *we've* gone vegan, what are *you* going to do?" suggests that in reality you had little freedom in the matter. But more importantly, I take your attitude to freedom of choice, perhaps arising from that incident, as a driver for your evangelical anti-meat-eating veganism, as you want to impose *your* choices on other people. just as you tried to with your dog, until you found out this could lead to trouble. So I can see why you need to defeat the idea of freedom of choice. But it isn't going to work. -- Spike |
#106
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 09:57, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 08/06/2021 13:59, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) I never mentioned your wife. Liar. As soon as I mentioned my wife had arthritis previously you mention the link to tomatoes (or some other troll, they all smell the same to me). T i m : "As soon as I mentioned my wife..." Spike: "I never mentioned your wife" T i m : "Liar" Hmmm. I think we can see who is telling porkies here... But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? Nope, That's a pity, as you put yourself forward as an expert on the subject of CD, but obviously daren't mention the topic at home. Are you hen-pecked? Perhaps you ought to stamp on that. -- Spike |
#107
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 11:26, Spike wrote:
On 09/06/2021 09:57, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 08/06/2021 13:59, T i m wrote: Spike wrote: On 07/06/2021 19:15, T i m wrote: Just did a nice pasta meal (her fave), had a vegan Magnum chock ice for pudding and I'm about to start my second beer. Pasta meals usually involve lots of (cheap) tomatoes - a known trigger for arthritic pain. The Aldi pasta sauce contains tomatoes but I didn't add any extra in this instance. So, you constantly harass me because you are concerned about my wife's *choice* to eat such things (because she likes to, even with her arthritis) I never mentioned your wife. Liar. As soon as I mentioned my wife had arthritis previously you mention the link to tomatoes (or some other troll, they all smell the same to me). T i m : "As soon as I mentioned my wife..." Spike: "I never mentioned your wife" T i m : "Liar" Hmmm. I think we can see who is telling porkies here... But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? Nope, That's a pity, as you put yourself forward as an expert on the subject of CD, but obviously daren't mention the topic at home. Are you hen-pecked? Perhaps you ought to stamp on that. T i m is ****ed that his wife won't let him eat meat. He misses those kebabs he used to munch on but won't dare to say this. |
#108
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 09:24, Andrew wrote:
On 08/06/2021 15:51, T i m wrote: On Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:11:23 +0100, Andrew wrote: snip And they do have shops in Scotland now you know? ;-) You should visit some of these crofts and you might be amazed how far you have to drive your diesel vehicle to get there, I have, and it was on a petrol motorcycle (doing 50 mpg). ;-) and how far they have to drive to get to a 'shop'. Ah yes, and for all those *choosing* to move there or even stay there, it's part of the cost of living there. eg. We *choose* to holiday in the country but we accept that it's not as convenient as living a walk from everything. Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Grants. Keep up ... You mean TAXES Perhaps fanatical vegans should pay this tax? https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants You either leave it to nature (costs nothing) or pay someone who is stuck there [1] to look after it for us all. If ypu are going to use (mostly) English taxes to pay those grants, then they might as well use animals to take care of the management (which they do, very effectively) and a useful byproduct is food for the people who live there to make sure the animals don't escape. What's more, now we have escaped the EU we could ditch all those idiotic regulations that forced the closure of many abbatoirs and resulted in animals being transported longer distances. It is shameful there are only a handful of abattoirs left in the UK. And the consequence of moving animals for long durations where it is difficult to make them comfortable. Given how cheap CCTV and recording equipment is these days there is no need to have a vet on each site. There are also exemption for religious slaughter where vets are not required, and these loopholes should be closed. Cheers, T i m [1] Many who were born in the back of beyond don't want to live in isolation in shift and mud all their lives and move to the towns. p.s. I saw on Countryfile where they were offering old farmers money to **** off to allow new people in (who would have a more 'forward thinking' attitude towards the environment). Or not, or the same. What makes you think that existing farmers don't care about the environment ?. From what I can see it is the regular invasion of (younger) townies, damaging dry-stone walls, and leaving crap (literally), single-use plastic and bbqs everywhere who care the least about the environment. I don't get this argument either, a young businessman is far more likely to look at the accounts bottom line than show a concern over the countryside. |
#109
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 11:10, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 09:24:50 +0100, Andrew wrote: snip Please explain how so-called 'rewilding' pays the bills ? Grants. Keep up ... You mean TAXES Strange, that link says it's grants that *pay* the people to do it? https://www.gov.uk/countryside-stewardship-grants You either leave it to nature (costs nothing) or pay someone who is stuck there [1] to look after it for us all. If ypu are going to use (mostly) English taxes to pay those grants, Obscure statement 1. The alternative is some fictitious money tree. Would you regard yourself to be a socialist perchance? then they might as well use animals to take care of the management (which they do, very effectively) and a useful byproduct is food for the people who live there to make sure the animals don't escape. Or not. A much kinder way than exploiting animals is to just let it rewild like it would have been before we turned up. Yes, ideally those people would just **** off and stop being a burden on others trying to have their subsistence life when the world won't support that number of people that way. What's more, now we have escaped the EU we could ditch all those idiotic regulations that forced the closure of many abbatoirs and resulted in animals being transported longer distances. Or, we could stop the idiotic approach of considering sentient beings as food when we don't need to? Hardly idiotic; where it shown that eating meat and meat products is part of a healthy natural balanced diet. Cheers, T i m [1] Many who were born in the back of beyond don't want to live in isolation in shift and mud all their lives and move to the towns. p.s. I saw on Countryfile where they were offering old farmers money to **** off to allow new people in (who would have a more 'forward thinking' attitude towards the environment). Or not, or the same. What makes you think that existing farmers don't care about the environment ?. I didn't, the Countryfile report on what the government were doing did. Existing long term farmers are similar to existing long term carnists in that they are lest likely to be sufficiently forward thinking to be willing to change. They are 'more likely' to be 'stuck in their ways'. Change is not always good. We have evolved to be omnivores, and require meat as part of a natural balanced diet. We are not carnists or carnivores like dogs or cats. It's unlikely any young farmer will be in doubt that feeding his children a vegan diet to his children will irreparably damage them and put them at the bottom of the class. |
#110
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:12:06 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? Sorry, I missed this point the first time round because I wasn't expecting anyone to be so stupid but you really are! My Mrs is fully aware of the discussion of the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis but *she* chooses for herself if she wants to carry on eating them or not. No dissonance, she's fully aware of the facts, her free choice. What you are getting confused about is the cognitive dissonance that allows people to both 'love' and 'kill' *innocent / sentient others*. But how are you getting on down that hole, digging away with all the sheep and cows you don't eat and all the other animals keeping a safe distance from you (especially the chickens obviously)? Cheers, T i m |
#111
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 13:46, T i m wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 08:12:06 +0000, Spike wrote: snip But now you have dragged her into the discussion, I take it you lecture her constantly about her cognitive dissonance concerning tomatoes and joint pain. No? Sorry, I missed this point the first time round because I wasn't expecting anyone to be so stupid but you really are! My Mrs is fully aware of the discussion of the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis but *she* chooses for herself if she wants to carry on eating them or not. No dissonance, she's fully aware of the facts, her free choice. What you are getting confused about is the cognitive dissonance that allows people to both 'love' and 'kill' *innocent / sentient others*. I would like the idea of killing a pet for food. Is that what you're trying to say? But how are you getting on down that hole, digging away with all the sheep and cows you don't eat and all the other animals keeping a safe distance from you (especially the chickens obviously)? Is that not the sort of choice your wife makes? Does she dig holes too? |
#112
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 10:24:19 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip I believe it's because you are lying or have something to hide as even someone as thick as you must know whey they have *chosen* (implying a decision) to not eat sheep or cows but eat everything else. I told you in a previous post about how choices can be influenced, snip subsequent bs unread So what *ACTUALLY* influenced you to make the choice not to eat sheep and cows? I mean, NOTHING you have said in your desperate attempts to not answer the simple and straightforward question was either new so informative to me, all it did is reinforce the point that you are a complete and utter nutjob. Adult: 'Why didn't you eat your sprouts?' 5 year old: 'They didn't taste very nice'. Adult: 'Thank you for that straightforward answer to a simple question'. Cheers, T i m |
#113
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 12:46, T i m wrote:
My Mrs is fully aware of the discussion of the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis but *she* chooses for herself if she wants to carry on eating them or not. No dissonance, she's fully aware of the facts, her free choice. That's the very definition of Cognitive Dissonance. Good luck in getting that across. -- Spike |
#114
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 13:07, T i m could have written, but didn't:
Adult: 'Why didn't you eat your sprouts?' 5 year old: 'Freedom of choice'. Adult: 'Thank you for that straightforward answer to a simple question'. -- Spike |
#115
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 13:29:21 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 09/06/2021 13:07, T i m could have written, but didn't: Adult: 'Why didn't you eat your sprouts?' 5 year old: 'Freedom of choice'. Adult: 'Thank you for that straightforward answer to a simple question'. No, I didn't because that's *no answer* is it, it's just an acknowledgement of the status quo. What is it with you and your desperate need to avoid answering the question? I get you have the 'freedom of choice' to not answer the question but it isn't an answer to the actual question, something that specifically pertinent to this particular topic / thread. So, given you actually like having someone to talk at for a change (so last chance) *why* don't you eat sheep and cows? Even someone a thick as you should be able to come up with something, even if it's just more lies and BS? Cheers, T i m |
#116
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 13:25:07 +0000, Spike
wrote: On 09/06/2021 12:46, T i m wrote: My Mrs is fully aware of the discussion of the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis but *she* chooses for herself if she wants to carry on eating them or not. No dissonance, she's fully aware of the facts, her free choice. That's the very definition of Cognitive Dissonance. Nope, that would be a denial of the potential link between the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis. That isn't the case here. Good luck in getting that across. Don't need to, it's her 'freedom of choice', just like it is for those who continue to smoke after being made aware of the risks or eating meat once they are aware of the price paid by others. It's the intentional (soften subconscious) disconnection from the facts that is the dissonance, not the *conscious* and full consideration of same. People who continue to smoke when fully aware of the risks are just making their own choice (for them at least). You are welcome. Cheers, T i m |
#117
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 14:08, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 09/06/2021 13:07, T i m could have written, but didn't: Adult: 'Why didn't you eat your sprouts?' 5 year old: 'Freedom of choice'. Adult: 'Thank you for that straightforward answer to a simple question'. No, I didn't because that's *no answer* is it, it's just an acknowledgement of the status quo. What is it with you and your desperate need to avoid answering the question? I get you have the 'freedom of choice' to not answer the question but it isn't an answer to the actual question, something that specifically pertinent to this particular topic / thread. So, given you actually like having someone to talk at for a change (so last chance) *why* don't you eat sheep and cows? Even someone a thick as you should be able to come up with something, even if it's just more lies and BS? You're really struggling with the concept of freedom, aren't you. I suppose that stems from your dystopian vision of a meat-free world and your anti-meat-eating veganist crusade, and removing freedom is your way to attain these aims. -- Spike |
#118
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 09/06/2021 15:07, T i m wrote:
Spike wrote: On 09/06/2021 12:46, T i m wrote: My Mrs is fully aware of the discussion of the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis but *she* chooses for herself if she wants to carry on eating them or not. No dissonance, she's fully aware of the facts, her free choice. That's the very definition of Cognitive Dissonance. Nope, that would be a denial of the potential link between the consumption of tomatoes and arthritis. That isn't the case here. Good luck in getting that across. Don't need to, it's her 'freedom of choice', just like it is for those who continue to smoke after being made aware of the risks or eating meat once they are aware of the price paid by others. It's the intentional (soften subconscious) disconnection from the facts that is the dissonance, not the *conscious* and full consideration of same. Just what do you think the 'Cognitive' part of 'Cognitive Dissonance' means? People who continue to smoke when fully aware of the risks are just making their own choice (for them at least). You're tolling, aren't you? Even a stunted-intelligence vegan can't be that dim. -- Spike |
#119
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 15:57:58 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip Don't need to, it's her 'freedom of choice', just like it is for those who continue to smoke after being made aware of the risks or eating meat once they are aware of the price paid by others. It's the intentional (soften subconscious) disconnection from the facts that is the dissonance, not the *conscious* and full consideration of same. Just what do you think the 'Cognitive' part of 'Cognitive Dissonance' means? More to me than to you obviously. People who continue to smoke when fully aware of the risks are just making their own choice (for them at least). You're tolling, aren't you? Oh the irony. Even a stunted-intelligence vegan can't be that dim. You are right, they probably wouldn't be as dim as someone who doesn't know why they don't eat sheep and cows but eat everything else. Cheers, T i m |
#120
![]()
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 9 Jun 2021 15:56:55 +0000, Spike
wrote: snip Even someone a thick as you should be able to come up with something, even if it's just more lies and BS? You're really struggling with the concept of freedom, aren't you. Nope. snip distraction / denial BS Right, given you are now saying you are *unwilling* (probably because you are unable) to answer *my* simple question of *why* you don't eat sheep and cows (something *you* were very proud to try to use to denigrate my vegan efforts at the time), you can now go back in my 'Ignore the stupid troll' list and just carry on wittering on to yourself. Nutjob. Cheers, T i m |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Mostly Vegan - Ping Tim | UK diy | |||
Massive 'Become a Pork Lover' bus sparks vegan protest as mounted police forced to intervene | Home Repair | |||
ot? the Vegan Imperetive; | Metalworking | |||
Letter from the children of Israel to the children of Lebanon and the | Home Repair |