4 ms·
Yeah I find it hard to believe anyone eats literally 100% meat no exceptions. I’ll bet $1000 Jordan Pederson is full of shit when he claims he eats nothing but
by simplecomplex 8y ago
Yeah I find it hard to believe anyone eats literally 100% meat no exceptions.
I’ll bet $1000 Jordan Pederson is full of shit when he claims he eats nothing but cooked beef.
- andai 8y agoRecently, he added chicken to the menu.
- virtuallynathan 8y agoYou’d be surprised... perhaps if you expand you definition of meat to animal products (eggs, cheese, fish, shellfish, etc), then I would say a growing number of people do this.
- geowwy 8y agoI don’t see what Jordan Peterson gains by lying. If anything it’s just another thing people can use to attack him.
- simple_phrases 8y agoHe and his daughter do consultations at $150/hour based on the diet, so he has $150/hour to gain by lying.
- sridca 8y agoBy your strange logic contractors and freelancers would automatically be lying as well.
- simple_phrases 8y agoFunny, I hire freelancers all the time and work as one myself. There are plenty of frauds who are all talk until it comes to proving their value, and then they can't. Why? There is an incentive to lie for a profit. However, I never claimed that Peterson is a fraud because he charges for consultations. I responded to a comment asking about what he had to gain from lying by showing that he has ample financial incentive to do so. Just because you disagree with my comment, doesn't mean you should strawman my post. People wouldn't be suspicious of Peterson's claims if he provided proof. I mean, even breatharians agreed to be documented while following their purported diet. Surely Peterson can do the same.
- sridca 8y agoThe keyword is "automatically". Your previous comment is cynical. Not even a modicum of curiosity is in there.
- simple_phrases 8y agoWeird, I don't see any curiosity in your posts, just emotional reactions to mine. You're also confusing healthy skepticism with lack of curiosity, almost as if you're jumping to the defense of something you made an emotional investment in without consulting rationality.
- sridca 8y ago> Weird, I don't see any curiosity in your posts, Curiosity as to what? The cynical content of your mind? > just emotional reactions to mine. Respond to my words, not your imaginations of what I'm feeling. > You're also confusing healthy skepticism with lack of curiosity, First of all, yours is a knee-jerk rejection of someone's report of recovering their health. It is unhealthy cynicism, and not even remotely healthy. It is just as well I did not have you advising me, all those years ago, when coming across the likes of Peterson and meatheals.com before proceeding with curiosity to heal my own chronic condition of 4 years, eh? Otherwise this conversation would not be happening. > almost as if you're jumping to the defense of something you made an emotional investment in without consulting rationality. Look, factual reports are there to establish a prima-facie case worthy of further investigation (sign of curiosity) – rather than capricious dismissal like yours (sign of cynicism) – and thus find out what it is on about. It is called being sensible. Maybe this is how your mind words, but neither emotional investment nor the counteracting rationality (which ironically tends to be emotion-influenced) is required. You need to have an emotional investment to be cynical.
- amanaplanacanal 8y agoThe Bear (Owsley Stanley) ate nothing but animal products for several decades. It's definitely possible.