Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Classy DemocratsFollow

#227 Oct 13 2009 at 9:18 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
trickybeck wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
When I say "not picky," I mean that I'm not bothered if something is bland, unsweetened, unseasoned, bitter, or mushy. Which many healthy foods happen to be.
This is completely untrue.
That's not an assertion you can even assign truth or untruth to.
I was asserting your idea that many healthy foods are bland, mushy or generally not very tasty, not the first part of the sentence. And that is untrue. If you don't care, that's fine, but there is nothing about healthy food that is in anyway linked to not tasting good.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#228 Oct 13 2009 at 9:57 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
I was asserting your idea that many healthy foods are bland, mushy or generally not very tasty, not the first part of the sentence. And that is untrue. If you don't care, that's fine, but there is nothing about healthy food that is in anyway linked to not tasting good.

Aha! That's a different argument. I never said that it was "linked," just that they exist.

And I only really need an indeterminate number of examples to qualify for "many" anyway.

At any rate, some examples from common items: Whole grain wheat is slightly more bitter than refined grain. Unsweetened yogurt is sour. Leafy green vegetables are woody, and sometimes bitter.

And healthy foods contain a minimum of sugar, fat, and salt. Three things, which are (individual pecularities of taste aside) pretty much universal flavor-enhancers.

Not that bitter is necessarily bad. It's something I've grown to like as my taste buds have matured, as evidenced by coffee, beer, pickles, etc. And not that sugar or fat always necessarily taste better - I dislike things that are syrupy sweet or too creamy. (Although some of this may be psychological - my subconscious telling me that I shouldn't like these bad things.)
But since we're examining something as intangible as taste, I'll defer to "experts" who in gourmet cuisine have long used indulgent, fatty ingredients when crafting exciting tastes. So there must be something to it.

At any rate, I feel like you're trying to pigeonhole me into the box of the troglodytic opinion "health food tastes bad." When I'm someone that actually enjoys many healthy foods. (Despite my not being picky, I do still have preferences). When it really just comes down the assertion that fat and sugar make things taste good but are bad for you. I didn't think this would be a radical statement.

#229 Oct 13 2009 at 10:36 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
Smiley: grin Well said. While I agree that fat and sugar do taste very good, and add lots of flavour, healthy food doesn't need to taste worse, and if it does you're doing it wrong. I don't think that's the case with you so Smiley: thumbsup Also fat can make a dish more healthy depending on your diet and the type of fat.

There is nothing actually unhealthy about meat fat. We need it to live, and small amounts of the right kind of fat not only is good for you, but satisfies you so you don't crave as much sugar and carbs. as always it's overdoing things that is bad.

____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#230 Oct 13 2009 at 10:40 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:


There is nothing actually unhealthy about meat fat. We need it to live


Bolded is untrue.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#231 Oct 13 2009 at 10:42 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
paulsol wrote:
Sir Xsarus wrote:


There is nothing actually unhealthy about meat fat. We need it to live


Bolded is untrue.
well, we need a source of fat to live. there are different ways to get it. So meat fat isn't essential, but that wasn't my point. Not clear I know, should have phrased it differently.

Edited, Oct 13th 2009 11:42pm by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#232 Oct 13 2009 at 10:45 PM Rating: Good
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts

Yeah, some fat is necessary. It's just something that's very easy to go overborad on if you're not label-reading.

And I agree with you that it's entirely possible to prepare good tasting health foods, but not everyone has the culinary skill (or patience). Which is why I'm glad that I don't have picky tastes and can eat things despite my poor cooking abilities :P



Edited, Oct 13th 2009 11:46pm by trickybeck
#233 Oct 13 2009 at 10:45 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
Meat fat isnt in itself harmful.

The methods of producing the meat in quantities sufficient to cater to todays (western) meat heavy diets are what make it harmful.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#234 Oct 13 2009 at 10:47 PM Rating: Good
*****
10,601 posts
paulsol wrote:
Meat fat isnt in itself harmful.

The methods of producing the meat in quantities sufficient to cater to todays (western) meat heavy diets are what make it harmful.
are you saying that the meat heavy diets are harmful, or that the methods somehow make the meat harmful?
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#235 Oct 13 2009 at 10:53 PM Rating: Good
****
4,158 posts
I'm saying that a diet heavy with meat that is farmed using todays industrial methods is harmful to the consumer and the environment.

The same applies to any heavily processed foods.
____________________________
"If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're gonna get selfish, ignorant leaders". Carlin.

#236 Oct 14 2009 at 2:54 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
All food is processed, I'm sure you mean what is added to it.
#237 Oct 14 2009 at 5:23 AM Rating: Good
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
Oddest derail ever.
#238REDACTED, Posted: Oct 14 2009 at 6:28 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Nadenu,
#239 Oct 14 2009 at 6:33 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,229 posts
You mean you got no-rated for being a complete **** and are now posting on a sock, varus?
#240 Oct 14 2009 at 7:00 AM Rating: Good
*****
15,952 posts
I haven't read this thread, so I humbly apologise for re-railing it abruptly.

Back in high-school English, learning about "class", we were taught that the Upper classes swore, and the Lower Classes swore, but the Middle classes didn't, and saw something wrong in it.

I will say that in practise swearing AT someone in the room in anger is aggressive, hostile, and thus immoral. But as for swearing in general, either as lighthearted bonhomie, or to emphasise something, or at things in general to let off steam... I see nothing wrong with that.

Edited, Oct 14th 2009 9:12am by Aripyanfar
#241 Oct 14 2009 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,909 posts
Swearing is a bit of a paradox. The word is only a rude word because it has impact when you say it. It only has impact because it's very rarely said, because it's such a bad word. You say it all the time and people get inured, all of the sudden the word doesn't shock anyone anymore. In Victoria, most people would think cunt is the rudest word you basically have (way ruder than fuck). They only think that because no-one says cunt. If everyone said cunt, it'd be mundane.

In short, the more you swear, the less rude the swearing becomes. So politicians swearing? Not a problem. The more they swear, the less rude they are. Eventually it's just fucking natural.
#242 Oct 14 2009 at 7:58 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,299 posts
caesaraugustus wrote:
Nadenu,

Thank you. I figured if I could get you people talking about food, good food, that might help your generally poor disposition towards life in general. I just totally used the jedi mind trick on all of you.


While I really don't think you believe half (or most) of the stuff you post, you come up with some strange ones.


you are only partially responsible for the derail. and in a small way.
#243 Oct 14 2009 at 8:02 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
caesaraugustus wrote:
Nadenu,

Thank you. I figured if I could get you people talking about food, good food, that might help your generally poor disposition towards life in general. I just totally used the jedi mind trick on all of you.
Wait one second there general. I contend that most the folks here have a better disposition towards life in general than you do. You fear and loathe everyone that isn't you!!
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#244 Oct 14 2009 at 8:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
Back in high-school English, learning about "class", we were taught that the Upper classes swore, and the Lower Classes swore, but the Middle classes didn't, and saw something wrong in it.


...Both groups having too much money or too little money to regard generalized social mores as important. Both groups also often acquired property through application of force too. It's an interesting dichotomy.

Edited, Oct 14th 2009 10:12am by Timelordwho
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#245 Oct 14 2009 at 8:16 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
Elinda wrote:
caesaraugustus wrote:
Nadenu,

Thank you. I figured if I could get you people talking about food, good food, that might help your generally poor disposition towards life in general. I just totally used the jedi mind trick on all of you.
Wait one second there general. I contend that most the folks here have a better disposition towards life in general than you do. You fear and loathe everyone that isn't you!!


I would posit that his self-loathing supersedes all other considerations.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#246 Oct 14 2009 at 8:31 AM Rating: Good
Samira wrote:
Elinda wrote:
caesaraugustus wrote:
Nadenu,

Thank you. I figured if I could get you people talking about food, good food, that might help your generally poor disposition towards life in general. I just totally used the jedi mind trick on all of you.
Wait one second there general. I contend that most the folks here have a better disposition towards life in general than you do. You fear and loathe everyone that isn't you!!


I would posit that his self-loathing supersedes all other considerations.


And he said he didn't like Europe. I can only assume that he never visited Britain - either that, or the old saying about misery loving company was *********
#247 Oct 14 2009 at 8:45 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
Why exactly, do admins continue to ban Varrus' accounts, but not IP block him? What's the point of it? Either ban him outright or just give it up.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#248 Oct 14 2009 at 8:48 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Quote:
Why exactly, do admins continue to ban Varrus' accounts, but not IP block him? What's the point of it? Either ban him outright or just give it up.

I'd imagine it has something to do with Kaolian's war on terror.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#249 Oct 14 2009 at 8:55 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
It reminds me of a "Make work program". I didn't realize the two of them were socialists.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#250 Oct 14 2009 at 9:00 AM Rating: Good
*****
12,049 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
Why exactly, do admins continue to ban Varrus' accounts, but not IP block him? What's the point of it? Either ban him outright or just give it up.


They do. He just gets a new IP address through a program. I also think restarting your router if you're on a landline works...

I'm kinda wondering why (and if) he was banned this time. Could just be another random sock. I mean, this time he didn't state that Chicago should be blown up by terrorists.
#251 Oct 14 2009 at 9:09 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
They do. He just gets a new IP address through a program. I also think restarting your router if you're on a landline works...
That doesn't change the fact that his last account reached 1600 posts. If they really wanted him gone, they'd keep banning each account as it comes up, but they don't/can't be ***** to, so why bother in the first place?

Because Kao and Varrus are closet commies.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 236 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (236)