On Mar 10, 3:51*pm, "Dutch" > wrote:
> "father of the bride" > wrote in messagenews:skcnl71rh3gpkeo79njgchogaa3hg9juki@fat her_of_the_bride...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 11:51:24 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
>
> >>"father of the bride" > wrote in message
> >>news:cacml79sd92idg3ebhq5i9fl77g91hdh4g@father_o f_the_bride...
> >>> On Sat, 10 Mar 2012 01:51:42 -0800 (PST), Rupert
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>>On Mar 7, 10:12 pm, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>>>> "Derek" > wrote:
> >>>>> > On Tue, 6 Mar 2012 10:59:20 -0800, "Dutch" > wrote:
> >>>>> >>"Derek" > wrote
>
> >>>>> >>> Don't pay any attention to the naysayers here.
>
> >>>>> >>That's bad advice.
>
> >>>>> >>> Their only objective
> >>>>> >>> is to make vegans feel that their efforts are worthless.
>
> >>>>> >>Some of their efforts have merit, for example a well
> >>>>> >>designed vegan diet can be healthy,
>
> >>>>> > You say that now, but you'll soon be back to saying,
>
> >>>>> > *"As I have mentioned here before, failure to thrive is
> >>>>> > * one of vegetarianism's dirty little secrets. I have
> >>>>> > * experienced it first- hand, my family returned to eating
> >>>>> > * meat after 18 years as vegetarians because of it."
> >>>>> > * Dutch Aug 5 2004http://tinyurl.com/yd5u5a
>
> >>>>> That doesn't contradict what I said above.
>
> >>> Yes, it does.
>
> >>No, it doesn't.
>
> > It does.
>
> >>>You said that "a well-designed vegan diet can
> >>> be healthy" above, but you've often said that it isn't and that
> >>> a failure to thrive on it is one of vegetarianism's dirty little
> >>> secrets. The only dirty little secret I can see is yours. You
> >>> haven't had any kids.
>
> >>Whether I actually have kids or I prefer to refer to 'my kids' in the
> >>hypothetical should be none of your concern.
>
> > It is my concern when you invent children to use as anecdotal
> > evidence a failure to thrive on a vegetarian diet.
>
> I never did that.
>
> > Your kids
> > didn't .suffer on a vegetarian diet
>
> I never said I had kids that suffered on a vegetarian diet.
>
> > And what was all that ********
> > about having to do all the hoovering while she was pregnant; another
> > hypothetical reference, or just another lie to reinforce the first one?
>
> Context ****wit.
>
> >>> You don't have a family.
>
> >>Yes I do.
>
> > I don't believe a word you say about your family, if in fact you
> > actually have one.
>
> >> > They and you
> >>> didn't fail to thrive on a vegetarian diet. Your anecdotal
> >>> evidence used to support your arguments is a lie.
>
> >>Yes we did
>
> > No, you didn't. You lied about having kids.
>
> I've referred in the past to kids as if I had them rather than say what I
> would do *if* I had kids. I have never said that I had kids who suffered
> from FTT.
>
> > You lied about your
> > family's failure to survive on a vegetarian diet.
>
> That was true.
>
> Pearl got you to
>
> > admit you'd lied:
>
> > [start - Pearl to Dutch]
> > > Of course I DON'T believe you. *No one does. *How could we.
> > > You LIED about having CHILDREN, for heaven's sake. *GLL!
> > [Dutch replied]
> > Nobody tells the whole truth all the time, and I advise strongly not to
> > try
> > to claim otherwise.
> > [end]
> > Dutch Oct 23 2006http://tinyurl.com/6psp6h7
>
> That's good advice, depending on the situation, people lie all the time,
> most many times a day.
>
>
>
> > You lied about your child status in alt.abortion, too, and used
> > personal anecdotes to bolster your arguments there.
>
> This is usenet Derek, not a court of law. *Being creative about your
> personal life and experiences is perfectly normal. Implying that you never
> lie is itself not credible.
>
> You can choose to believe that since I referred to children that I don't
> have that discredits everything I have said, but I have have given other
> evidence about FTT in vegetarianism, and besides it's a fallacy.


LOL!! Goo trained you to lie like a drunken sailor and just like Goo
you got caught at it.