offense74

Well, religion change too, as can be seen in the different interpretations of the christian religion (derived from what is written in the bible). Also, agnosticism can be anything, it doesn't even have to have rules. I like to describe religion as series of ad hoc statements added to the subjective reality to "fill in the gaps".

False. Either it's some kind of limerick that I don't get or it's some furreal Ivanhoe stuff? True or false, you are an American and you know the difference between Sweden and Switzerland.

I don't understand what the big deal is? Are people who are fucking worse leaders? Is there a correlation with fucking and handling a budget badly? If a presidential candidate had a solution for sustainable living in the 21 century, I'd vote for him even if he were covered in semen wearing nothing but a butt plug.

I don't like invertebrates in general. Mostly I dislike scorpions. And wasps because they're annoying. Horse-flies are disturbing too.

Me also.

Some very wrong and even dangerous ideas have come out of using "common sense" in the past. Science made those guesses more on par with reality and thus our common sense are now sharpened. I'm not against making guesses based on feelings, belief or religion. The problem I have is mostly when the religious guesses or the common sense contradicts the facts. B-12 is a good example of this.

I guess we're just going to hug without him. That's right, no more love for you BW!!

I love you beforewisdom! If it's not science it is religion. And how do you critique religion to a religious person who agrees that it is not science and that that is a good thing? This is where we've ended up in the past when discussing this. This is about understanding the scientific, empirical method. For some reason this understanding is lessening all over the place it seems and don't know exactly why. One theory I have is that some scientific data (that are part of a bigger picture) sometimes gets drawn out of it's context because of political and/or economical reason. The dairy industry and it's lobbying is a good example of this. This doesn't change the big picture though, just peoples perspective on it. But when the perspective change and the subjective reality is obviously not in sync with the objective reality (if there's such a thing) then "science" gets the blame because it was the source of the partly true information. It's just a theory I have.

Thanks DV! We've had this discussion before and we came to the conclusion that "anything goes" in the raw part of the forum. That means that critique is off limits and is not allowed. However, people from all over the world is watching this board, some with interest and some with contempt. As plant eaters we are always in the line of fire. Threads on this forum can be pointed to from other places on the 'net with potentially huge amounts of readers (ie bodybuilding.com). If noone here critiques ass flushing or "detox syrups" as a means to achieve muscle and/or health we as a community will not have credibility. I believe that just as low-carb is a fad among many bodybuilders, raw foodism is a fad among vegans. We need to be able to deliver critique on this part of the forum too.

This will make people eat more meat, just to get back at PETA. It's some of the dumbest shit I've seen, even on the internet.

Oh, I see. But then how can you kick it?

You went all matrix on his ass. BTW, where is his ass??

I saw your exact same post over at vf. It turned out quite different didn't it? Life would be so much easier if some vegans weren't vegans.....

Nice to see your progress! Do you still have cravings for crap food? They should have disappeared by now in my experience.

Yeah, but you also have to add that they were eating raw which means that they needed 50% less of what we don't know they needed. Did that clear things up for you?

Show me one study and I'll debunk it. I do hope it's not true...as a vegan,Soy means a lot to me.. below are the links http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=459861 http://www.sciam.com/blog/60-second-science/post.cfm?id=soy-vey-does-eating-tofu-lower-sper-2008-07-23 the worst part is this: http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=459516 Article no1 is just a bunch of garbage. IGF-1 (which he says is lowered with soy) is probably not a good thing to have high values of. Like I said above, he uses Japanese men as the scare crow for fertility. All 65 million of them. They are running out of space and resources over there because of the immense fucking going on. There is also a whole lot of studies on rats, mice and monkeys there. We are not rats. We are humans. Or maybe vampires if you're on atkins. The third article is on a book written by Kaayla T. Daniel. John Robbins is on her. Here, from a low-carb magazine.Apparently she is "a member of the Board of Directors of the Weston A. Price Foundation in Washington, DC". Surprise, surprise. It's like asking Hersheys if chocolate is good for you.

Doesn't seem like they have a problem producing children in China or any other place where soy is frequently eaten....

Yeah, where is the queen of the protein? See how that rhymes? I'm goood!

Hancock It was fun!

You don't mess with the Zohan! Awesome movie! I like Adam Sandler!

Here's another video where he recommends you to not stop smoking right away. Also 1 french (freedom?) fries is worse for you than 1 cigarette: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9DZBzKppHQ&feature=related He's a jackass.

Yes, he's here! He's having daily bouts with the berserk vikings and the polar bears that frequently walk our streets...

Oh yeah that's a great song Thanks!

Do you think there's a possibility to get this screened in churches in the midwest? Maybe after showing an inconvenient truth and BBC's walking with dinosaurs? Thanks, that would be great!

Potatoes rock!!