Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: Are these people Libertarians?

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by doctorallen View Post
    A lot of experts believe that cancer is a "man-made"disease or a "modern man's disease". This is so because our so-called modern lifestyle has introduced a number of toxins into our systems which are cancer-causing in nature.


    Our meats are laced with nitrites - water is brimming with lead - air has all types of heavy metals- and food is artificially flavored with toxic compounds.

    Do you think the government has NO role in regulating these??
    I think the government is not competent when it comes to medicine and is extremely susceptible to corruption.

    Government involvement would guarantee political interference and a motivation to never find a cure in order to keep a reason for the bureaucrats involved to keep their budget.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Unregistered View Post
    I know all these groups actually exist because I have looked them up on Google.
    Good idea.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by doctorallen View Post
    A lot of experts believe that cancer is a "man-made"disease ......
    No expert actually believes that.

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    No expert actually believes that.
    Hey Angela, not taking anyone’s side here, but I had a question that may be thought-provoking for all sides:

    these experts, if I were talking to them in 1995, telling them that the newly-created Food Pyramid was bogus and stupid, and that cholesterol was fine, good for you and awesome in fact, would they have listened? What percentage of these “experts” would I have been able to bring around to my point of view?

    Zero? Or negative zero?

    Wiuld I need to use imaginary numbers to express it?

    What could I have possibly said back in 1995 that would have convinced even a single one of them?

    Food for thought....

  7. #35
    Remember guys: We all have dormant cancer in all of us.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by H_H View Post
    Hey Angela, not taking anyone’s side here, but I had a question that may be thought-provoking for all sides:

    these experts, if I were talking to them in 1995, telling them that the newly-created Food Pyramid was bogus and stupid, and that cholesterol was fine, good for you and awesome in fact, would they have listened? What percentage of these “experts” would I have been able to bring around to my point of view?

    Zero? Or negative zero?

    Wiuld I need to use imaginary numbers to express it?

    What could I have possibly said back in 1995 that would have convinced even a single one of them?

    Food for thought....
    The fact that those same experts modified their positions after new evidence emerged speaks well of the process. As to the original post, there is evidence of cancer in ancient history. And an average lifespan of 35 meant a lot of later-in-life diseases never got the chance to manifest in great numbers.

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    The fact that those same experts modified their positions after new evidence emerged speaks well of the process.
    Umm, new evidence like the revelation that "sugars" and "fats" are actually -- it turns out! -- completely different macronutrients?



    Come on, this is retard-tier. Don't give me that. I know you're a woman, but you are intelligent and furthermore even have some expertise in this area, at least generally (science, medicine, biology).

    I mean, look at the thing. Putting sugars and fats in the same category -- "bad things we recommend you minimize" -- is too obviously a blatant falsehood to not be intentional and malicious. It's retard-tier. And yet people, including 100% of degreed and certified nutritionists in this country, pretended to believe it.

    Why is that?

    Hmm?

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by H_H View Post

    I mean, look at the thing. Putting sugars and fats in the same category -- "bad things we recommend you minimize" -- is too obviously a blatant falsehood to not be intentional and malicious. It's retard-tier. And yet people, including 100% of degreed and certified nutritionists in this country, pretended to believe it.


    ?
    The category is titled "Use sparingly." It contains all fats, and foods with added sugar. Why does that seem retarded?

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by H_H View Post
    Umm, new evidence like the revelation that "sugars" and "fats" are actually -- it turns out! -- completely different macronutrients?



    Come on, this is retard-tier. Don't give me that. I know you're a woman, but you are intelligent and furthermore even have some expertise in this area, at least generally (science, medicine, biology).

    I mean, look at the thing. Putting sugars and fats in the same category -- "bad things we recommend you minimize" -- is too obviously a blatant falsehood to not be intentional and malicious. It's retard-tier. And yet people, including 100% of degreed and certified nutritionists in this country, pretended to believe it.

    Why is that?

    Hmm?
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    The category is titled "Use sparingly." It contains all fats, and foods with added sugar. Why does that seem retarded?
    Starches should be in the same category as sugar because they are broken down into sugars.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by angelatc View Post
    The category is titled "Use sparingly." It contains all fats, and foods with added sugar. Why does that seem retarded?
    Let me break it down. Interpret the graphical doohicks and unlock the mysteries of the symbology.

    See the little dots? There's two slightly different kinds, circles and triangles, but the Swedish woman who invented this intentionally made them both tiny so they are visually almost identical. Notice how they are scattered throughout the Great Pyramid but smoothly become less and less dense towards the Mighty Base? This is the fundamental basis for the whole theory. She's telling you right there, it's just she elegantly jam-packed too much information into one graphic perhaps for the typical person to catch it all. I didn't know that (it seemed obvious to me), but you missed it, so clearly the vast majority of people will.

    Fats and sugars are both bad. This is the theory. So you try to focus on scarfing foods with as little of them as possible, meaning, first and foremost, their massive carb group down at the bottom.

    The theory is bizarre and baseless and always was, and in a rational world, that fact would have been sufficient. I could have said to the nutrExpert back in 1995: "Yo, bro, this theory is bizarre and baseless." He'd be like, "Wat? Back up." I'd lay it down: "There's no reason to believe this. You tell me what data or studies make you believe this and I'll put the smack down on them one by one. But first and foremost, it makes no rational sense because humans have been eating meat and vegetables all along; why would we not just eat meats and vegetables?" Any being capable of reflection would then be like, "Yeah, that's true. What problem is this even fixing?"

    And then if he was gonna be debatative (which is cool) he might say, "OK, let's go into it then. The problem it's fixing is heart attacks and the such. That one guy [WHO FALSIFIED HIS DATA] in the '50s fed tons of eggs to rabbits and they all got cardiovascular problems and junk. Whatchoo say 'bout that?"

    "Well, rabbits are herbivores, bro. You think maybe they might not be set up for that? Like, you wanna do an experiment where we feed a bunch of dogs nothing but chocolate for a year to prove chocolate will kill you? It's totally invalid, bro. Plus, even if weren't grossly and obviously invalid, THE GREASY SLIMEBALL FALSIFIED HIS DATA! (but maybe I wouldn't have known that in 1995 -- I don't remember when it came out that he falsified his data.)"

    And then IF HE WERE HONEST he'd be like, "OK, you got me, bro." And then he could move on to another study (except there aren't any) and I could shoot them down one by one, and then he'd say, "Wow. I guess you're right. There really isn't any reason to believe this." And then he'd change his opinion to be correct and in line with the truth and reality.

    Right?

    Ha ha ha ha ha!

    Yes, IF HE WERE HONEST I suppose that's exactly what would happen. But Angela, IF HE WERE HONEST he would have never had to have me tell him this stuff in the first place. I mean, this is his career. Right? This is his life, his passion, his livelihood. So why the heck is he believing that cholesterol is a deadly poison?

    Why were 10,000 other nutrExperts, or however many there were; it was 100% of the group, I'll tell you that, whatever the exact size of it was -- why were these Experts all totally 100% on board going along with made-up stories IN THEIR FIELD which were obviously, blatantly false?

    At least some of these people were intelligent.

    At least some of these people were Player Characters with agency, an inner monologue, a soul: the works.

    So waddup nigga? What was going down there all up in that specialty?

    You come up with an answer to that question and you will maybe start to be having an answer to some puzzling riddles about this society we find ourselves living in.



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Grisham View Post
    Yes, apparently they are what's known as 'Globalists'.

    But I don't know if they have any real power to actually do anything.

    See; George Soros, his life is 'funding' agitators (or is it taters ) and organizing caravans' .
    That's just one individual globalist.

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by H_H View Post
    What was going down there all up in that specialty?

    You come up with an answer to that question
    And just to be clear, as a reminder, the question is:

    Why did they all pretend to believe it?

    Because pretending was definitely what they were doing. No smart person ever believed in the food pyramid. Ever. It would be impossible to take even, say, eight hours of one's mental cycles operating at an IQ level of 110 or higher and with extensive nutritional training and devote them to a rigorous and focused consideration of said pyramid and come out the other end with the conclusion: "Oh yeah, seems legit."

    So again:

    Why did they all pretend to believe it?

    Hmm?

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 143
    Last Post: 03-02-2016, 08:41 AM
  2. 11 Types Of People Libertarians Are Totally Fed Up With
    By Suzanimal in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 11-23-2014, 11:20 PM
  3. Why aren't more people libertarians?
    By juliusaugustus in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 10-23-2012, 11:07 AM
  4. What percent of people are libertarians?
    By Howard_Roark in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 03-21-2009, 05:12 PM
  5. Replies: 61
    Last Post: 11-06-2008, 05:32 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •