Definition: Veganism is a way of life which seeks to exclude as far as practicable all forms of harm to animals for food, clothing, or any other purpose.
Claim: We should all be vegan.
@Veganella_ Honestly.. I know the guy's either a troll or not very bright but pretty much every response on there is wildly unhelpful. Why bother contributing to such discussions if it's just sarcastic jokes?
Lay it out simply: He can't just add them up, he has to then average them too.
@CarnivoreDad@beeaannZzZ @ScepticalDoctor If you're combining them, you need to take the average. Not just add them together.
Based on your calculation of a total of 717 L, that would be roughly 180 L on average between those 4 plant milks.
@Emlougar A few people who think a bit differently about this stuff who might offer a helpful perspective / some helpful content:
Bren Veziroglu
https://t.co/7JKVtKOCqh
https://t.co/S1bNEo8bDp
The Bioneer
Knees Over Toes Guy
Ido Portal
Jon Yuen
@Emlougar From experience, a lot of conventional 'wisdom' on training is really unhealthy. I had awful knees in my 20s, but in my 30s they're doing really well. My suggestion is to delete your current training & start again. Forget everything you think you should be doing.
@LinhardAnne@Veganella_@Kentlapp@SimmonsBart 2. A huge part of the world can't raise livestock without harvesting or importing feed for the winter
3. Haying fields is not very disruptive? What do you mean?
@LinhardAnne@Veganella_@Kentlapp@SimmonsBart 1. You are comparing the worst of arable (industrial monoculture) with the "best" of animal ("regenerative"). Not a fair comparison. The comparison might look more like:
- industrial arable vs industrial animal
- veganic farming vs "regenerative" grazing
@zygradel @CFCDave65@BenGoldsmith Your "points" are not reasoned. You just say things. Things that apparently make sense to you, with a tone that echoes genuine logical argument. I will not respond directly to any of it because it would imply that anything you've said made any kind of sense in the first place.
@BradSchoenfeld@blackatlantic For example, the Walnut Board of California had some study conducted showing the health benefits of walnuts. Now I cannot use that study to show the health benefits of nuts.
@BradSchoenfeld@blackatlantic No. Dismiss immediately any study that has a clear financial or political conflict of interest. Especially when they're explicitly acknowledging that people "received funding to research and write this".
@stellarteta @carlolme @waiterich @daveguitarclark 2. The bigger picture is over the last few hundred, or last few thousand, years. The world has undeniably lost a significant amount of forest, and a few decades of greening don't overcome that. One example linked.
https://t.co/n2Xqg66HN5
@stellarteta @carlolme @waiterich @daveguitarclark 1. "which is thought to be due to intensive agriculture [...] and ambitious tree-planting programs"
The article your basing your claims on says that a large amount of this 'greening' is intensive agriculture. Pause and think about that for a moment?
@darlingkillers@mollyelwood "I will never not kill animals. But here's a way to talk about why killing animals is bad that would make me less annoyed when you point out that I'm guilty of it."
@PaulKirkby3@Jenny_1884 I am entitled to continue to believe that being part of the EU would be beneficial to us and the wider world.
There is no law, rule, or moral precedent of any kind that says I can't continue to harp on about this until I get bored or Britain becomes a member again.
@lazarwolfbk@pragmaprism @waiterich The story is different in every country, but there is a very common pattern: forest and wild grassland destroyed to make way for agriculture. Biodiversity and carbon capture lost to the industrial production of a few domesticated species.
@lazarwolfbk@pragmaprism @waiterich According to the US government, the USA has lost about 30% of its forests in the last 400 years. And read the rest of the brochure to discover why that's worse than it sounds.