5 ms·

>Citation please. https://www.google.com/search?q=co2%20plant%20nutrition https://www.google.com/search?q=co2%20plant%20nutrition >Naturalistic fallacy. "Indu

>Citation please. https://www.google.com/search?q=co2%20plant%20nutrition https://www.google.com/search?q=co2%20plant%20nutrition >Naturalistic fallacy. "Industrial waste" isn't necessarily harmful. It is not a naturalistic fallacy. The things I mentioned are harmful. Industrial waste may not be necessarily harmful, but it is also not necessarily food. We consume it because it is industrial waste, not because it is food. It is harmful, we consume it in vast quantities, it did not even exist before the early 1900s. >"More people" is an irrelevant metric, what matters is the percentage of people relative to the total. That's a meaningful measure of progress. It is more as a percentage. >Such as? Do you think nutritional deficiencies don't exist any more? Common deficiencies include iron, B12, D, calcium, A, iodine, magnesium, zinc and folate. People now eat fewer vegetables, which contain fewer micronutrients, and we have almost completely removed organ meat from our diets altogether. >The latter of which was either common back then also, or uncommon because they didn't live long enough to develop it. Those are conflicting explanations. You can't dismiss a problem by throwing out random conflicting excuses. No, osteoporosis was not common then. "Type 2 diabetes" and heart disease both didn't even exist, and now are so widespread that they are top killers. >As for type II diabetes, it's a disease of abundance, which proves my point. No, it is a disease of consumption of toxic omega 6 polyunsaturated fats. Fat people existed in medieval times. They did not get "type 2 diabetes". And it still would not prove your point, as overeating is not the same as healthy. I said people ate healthier. People eating high calorie low nutrient food and getting morbidly obese now supports my point, it does not contradict it. >That often starved during campaigns. Only if you have an unusual definition of "often". And those incidents were due to being cut off from supplies. Another army preventing your food from getting to you is not an indication that you are unable to grow enough food and thus "everyone is spending all day trying to stave off starvation". >During which they had to ration food, developed nutritional deficiencies, and died of exposure Except none of those things. Those are the times they spent feasting. We still have several of the same traditional feasts, just renamed to pretend they are christian. >So your claims that modern rates are higher are also pure conjecture. Modern rates are higher than any other point in recorded history. We have poorer data from ancient times, but we do still have data. You even linked to some. And it indicates that suicide was rare, and when it did happen it was mainly out of shame or a sense of honor having done something wrong. There is no reason to assume suicide rates were higher in medieval times just because you want to believe the iron age was some horrific time. Again, the people who still live in the stone age today and are healthier and happier than us right now, and have essentially no modern "mental illnesses" like depression or social anxiety and no modern dietary diseases like "type 2 diabetes", even the ones with BMI scores in the "morbidly obese" category. Because they do not possess the technology to create petrochemical solvents necessary to extract toxic seed oils. We are just supposed to ignore that because they inconveniently point to modern society being harmful?

kortilla 8y ago
>Again, the people who still live in the stone age today and are healthier and happier than us right now, That’s a senseless statement. Nobody lives in the Stone Age today. That’s a period of time. If you’re referring to primitive tribes with no outside world contact, then you’ll need to provide evidence and definitions for healthier/happier. They have high infant mortality rates, they kill disabled children, they die from treatable illnesses, and they starve during bad years. Of course they have mental illness, there is no evidence they are immune to Down syndrome, schizophrenia, or anything else. They are just much more likely to murder or ostracize people having too much difficulty fitting into the tribe. >It is harmful, we consume it in vast quantities Ugh, you accidentally forgot to provide any evidence of its harm again. You just preceded it with another naturalistic fallacy that implied that it must be harmful because it’s industrial.
- agsdfgsd 8y ago
  >Nobody lives in the Stone Age today. That’s a period of time. Yes they do. It is a period of technological development. There is no singular timespan that makes up the stone age or bronze age or iron age, those periods are different depending on the people. >If you’re referring to primitive tribes with no outside world contact They have outside world contact, they simply choose to continue living the way they prefer instead of adopting modernity. >then you’ll need to provide evidence and definitions for healthier/happier The dictionary already does. >They have high infant mortality rates, they kill disabled children, they die from treatable illnesses, and they starve during bad years. The first three things are not healthy, and the last thing is false. >Of course they have mental illness, there is no evidence they are immune to Down syndrome, schizophrenia, or anything else. Please attempt to read what is being said rather than intentionally taking an obviously contrary definition so you have something to argue about. I am talking about the modern "mental illnesses", note the quotes, like depression and social anxiety which are epidemic in modernity, and do not exist in primitive cultures. >Ugh, you accidentally forgot to provide any evidence of its harm again Almost as if this is a discussion and not me publishing a scientific paper. You are welcome to look up the data linking omega 6 polyunsaturated fats to the modern disease epidemic. >You just preceded it with another naturalistic fallacy that implied that it must be harmful because it’s industrial. Simply repeating the fallacy fallacy is not going to accomplish anything.

kortilla 8y ago

>Again, the people who still live in the stone age today and are healthier and happier than us right now, That’s a senseless statement. Nobody lives in the Stone Age today. That’s a period of time. If you’re referring to primitive tribes with no outside world contact, then you’ll need to provide evidence and definitions for healthier/happier. They have high infant mortality rates, they kill disabled children, they die from treatable illnesses, and they starve during bad years. Of course they have mental illness, there is no evidence they are immune to Down syndrome, schizophrenia, or anything else. They are just much more likely to murder or ostracize people having too much difficulty fitting into the tribe. >It is harmful, we consume it in vast quantities Ugh, you accidentally forgot to provide any evidence of its harm again. You just preceded it with another naturalistic fallacy that implied that it must be harmful because it’s industrial.

agsdfgsd 8y ago
>Nobody lives in the Stone Age today. That’s a period of time. Yes they do. It is a period of technological development. There is no singular timespan that makes up the stone age or bronze age or iron age, those periods are different depending on the people. >If you’re referring to primitive tribes with no outside world contact They have outside world contact, they simply choose to continue living the way they prefer instead of adopting modernity. >then you’ll need to provide evidence and definitions for healthier/happier The dictionary already does. >They have high infant mortality rates, they kill disabled children, they die from treatable illnesses, and they starve during bad years. The first three things are not healthy, and the last thing is false. >Of course they have mental illness, there is no evidence they are immune to Down syndrome, schizophrenia, or anything else. Please attempt to read what is being said rather than intentionally taking an obviously contrary definition so you have something to argue about. I am talking about the modern "mental illnesses", note the quotes, like depression and social anxiety which are epidemic in modernity, and do not exist in primitive cultures. >Ugh, you accidentally forgot to provide any evidence of its harm again Almost as if this is a discussion and not me publishing a scientific paper. You are welcome to look up the data linking omega 6 polyunsaturated fats to the modern disease epidemic. >You just preceded it with another naturalistic fallacy that implied that it must be harmful because it’s industrial. Simply repeating the fallacy fallacy is not going to accomplish anything.