Prev: My Moral Evaluation Of People Who Approve Of Using Someone's Mental Health History As a Means of Denigrating Them
Next: I notice most if not all those vegetarians are dead!
From: dh on 27 Aug 2008 11:51
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Goo wrote:

>On Aug 26, 11:45 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 26, 9:12 pm, Goo wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 26, 5:22 pm, use...(a)mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr.
>>
>> > Jai Maharaj) wrote:
>> > > Fact City 19
>>
>> > > Eating Meat Wastes Our Resources
>>
>> > > When it comes to resource and energy wastage, meat products
>> > > are a class by themselves.
>>
>> > > Scientists compute the energy costs of foods by the value
>> > > of the raw materials consumed in the production of that
>> > > food. Frances Moore Lappe reports:
>>
>> > > A detailed 1978 study sponsored by the Department of
>> > > Interior and Commerce produced startling figures showing
>> > > that the value of raw materials consumed to produce food
>> > > from livestock is greater than the value of all oil,
>> > > gas, and coal consumed in this country.
>>
>> > > The same study revealed the equally startling fact that the
>> > > production of meats, dairy products and eggs accounts for
>> > > one-third of the total amount of all raw materials used for
>> > > all purposes in the United States.
>>
>> > > In contrast, growing grains, vegetables and fruits for
>> > > direct human consumprion is a model of efficiency, using
>> > > less than 5% the raw material consumption as does the
>> > > production of meat.
>>
>> > > Another way scientists compute the energy costs of various
>> > > foods is to assess the amount of fossil fuel needed to
>> > > produce them. An American scientist, David Pimental,
>>
>> > Not a scientist, of course.
>>
>> > > calculates that if the whole world were to eat according to
>> > > wasteful U.S. agricultural practices, the planet's entire
>> > > petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 13 years.
>>
>> > So, rupie, once *AGAIN*, we see that the bogus "inefficiency" argument
>> > is *not* about environmental concerns, but is, as I have always
>> > maintained, a *BOGUS* argument about resource allocation, and a
>> > complete *misperception* of the notion of value.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> I already conceded everything that needed to be conceded on that
>> point.
>
>No, you fudged and qualified that.

Try to explain just what it is you think you're trying to talk
about Goo. Go:

>It was an insincere and phony
>concession - typical of your intellectual dishonesty.
>
>
>> Could you answer my question in the other thread, please?
>>
>> Your decision to take up the hobby of trying to annoy people and waste
>> their time on the internet:
>
>No such hobby.

All you do is waste time Goo, without ever contributing anything
of value. For example: In the message I'm replying to you wasted
time and contributed nothing of value. For another example: In
your next post you will waste time and contribute nothing of value.
Etc.............................................
From: dh on 31 Aug 2008 10:48
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008, Goo wrote:

>On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:51:16 -0100, dh@. wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Goo wrote:
>>
>>>On Aug 26, 11:45 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>> On Aug 26, 9:12 pm, Goo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On Aug 26, 5:22 pm, use...(a)mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr.
>>>>
>>>> > Jai Maharaj) wrote:
>>>> > > Fact City 19
>>>>
>>>> > > Eating Meat Wastes Our Resources
>>>>
>>>> > > When it comes to resource and energy wastage, meat products
>>>> > > are a class by themselves.
>>>>
>>>> > > Scientists compute the energy costs of foods by the value
>>>> > > of the raw materials consumed in the production of that
>>>> > > food. Frances Moore Lappe reports:
>>>>
>>>> > > A detailed 1978 study sponsored by the Department of
>>>> > > Interior and Commerce produced startling figures showing
>>>> > > that the value of raw materials consumed to produce food
>>>> > > from livestock is greater than the value of all oil,
>>>> > > gas, and coal consumed in this country.
>>>>
>>>> > > The same study revealed the equally startling fact that the
>>>> > > production of meats, dairy products and eggs accounts for
>>>> > > one-third of the total amount of all raw materials used for
>>>> > > all purposes in the United States.
>>>>
>>>> > > In contrast, growing grains, vegetables and fruits for
>>>> > > direct human consumprion is a model of efficiency, using
>>>> > > less than 5% the raw material consumption as does the
>>>> > > production of meat.
>>>>
>>>> > > Another way scientists compute the energy costs of various
>>>> > > foods is to assess the amount of fossil fuel needed to
>>>> > > produce them. An American scientist, David Pimental,
>>>>
>>>> > Not a scientist, of course.
>>>>
>>>> > > calculates that if the whole world were to eat according to
>>>> > > wasteful U.S. agricultural practices, the planet's entire
>>>> > > petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 13 years.
>>>>
>>>> > So, rupie, once *AGAIN*, we see that the bogus "inefficiency" argument
>>>> > is *not* about environmental concerns, but is, as I have always
>>>> > maintained, a *BOGUS* argument about resource allocation, and a
>>>> > complete *misperception* of the notion of value.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> > - Show quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> I already conceded everything that needed to be conceded on that
>>>> point.
>>>
>>>No, you fudged and qualified that.
>>
>> Try to explain just what it is you think you're trying to talk
>>about Goo. Go:
>
>Everything has been explained. You are too stupid to understand.

I challenge you to find out if I'm too stupid to understand, by
posting whatever it is you think you're trying to talk about now
Goo. GO:


(Correct prediction: The Goober--as always--will prove himself
incapable of trying to explain what he thinks he's trying to
talk about.)

>>>It was an insincere and phony
>>>concession - typical of your intellectual dishonesty.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Could you answer my question in the other thread, please?
>>>>
>>>> Your decision to take up the hobby of trying to annoy people and waste
>>>> their time on the internet:
>>>
>>>No such hobby.
>>
>> All you do is waste time Goo, without ever contributing anything
>>of value. For example: In the message I'm replying to you wasted
>>time and contributed nothing of value. For another example: In
>>your next post you will waste time and contribute nothing of value.
>>Etc.............................................

 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: My Moral Evaluation Of People Who Approve Of Using Someone's Mental Health History As a Means of Denigrating Them
Next: I notice most if not all those vegetarians are dead!