|
Posted to alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian,rec.sport.football.college,alt.food.vegan,rec.food.cooking,alt.gothic
|
|
|
DOZENS OF WORLD CLASS ATHLETIC VEGANS SUPPORT ME IN EMAIL
On Oct 15, 6:44*pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> On 10/15/2012 9:42 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 15, 6:40 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >> On 10/15/2012 9:15 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>> On Oct 15, 6:11 pm, "Mr. N.A.Cho" > wrote:
> >>>> On Oct 15, 12:07 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
>
> >>>>> On 10/14/2012 1:45 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On Oct 14, 1:51 am, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 10/13/2012 9:48 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> On Oct 13, 5:47 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2012 9:49 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 6:10 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On 10/12/2012 7:48 AM, Rupert wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Oct 12, 4:17 pm, "The Undead Edward M. Kennedy" > wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> None of them, unfortunately, will actually admit to their existence on
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the usenet.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> --Tedward
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> It would be very easy for you to verify the existence of many world-
> >>>>>>>>>>>> class vegan athletes if you wished to. Google is your friend..
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Ha ha ha ha ha! *It would be very easy for *you* simply to list the
> >>>>>>>>>>> names of 50-100 of them, if there really were "quite a few" such who are
> >>>>>>>>>>> *currently* "world-class" athletes who are also "vegan". *I *did*
> >>>>>>>>>>> attempt to Google such a list, and as I already posted, a) most of them
> >>>>>>>>>>> are not "vegan" but rather some degree of vegetarian, and b) most of
> >>>>>>>>>>> them weren't even vegetarian during their years as active "world-class"
> >>>>>>>>>>> athletes.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Your claim is bullshit.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>http://kaleuniversity.org/3888-famou...n-bodybuilders
>
> >>>>>>>>>> "Dave Scott (six-time winner
> >>>>>>>>>> of Hawaii's Ironman Triathlon), Sixto Linares (world record
> >>>>>>>>>> holder for the 24-hour triathlon),
>
> >>>>>>>>> These lists are just stupid. *Why are "vegans" so ****ing insecure they
> >>>>>>>>> feel they need to put them together?
>
> >>>>>>>> The point of the list is to demonstrate that it is perfectly possible
> >>>>>>>> to get peak nutrition on a vegan diet.
>
> >>>>>>> No, that's *not* the point of the list, and you ****ing well know it.
> >>>>>>> The point of the list is to try to attach some of the prestige of
> >>>>>>> "world-class" athletes to "veganism".
>
> >>>>>> What an interesting opinion you have there.
>
> >>>>> It's a statement of fact. *That's what *all* those lists are. *"vegans"
> >>>>> are very acutely aware of their lunatic-fringe status, and these lists
> >>>>> are a desperate, plaintive effort to try to attach prestige to their
> >>>>> position. *It's a form of appeal to authority - a logical fallacy..
>
> >>>>>>>>> * * *Any why is the list of *real*
> >>>>>>>>> "world-class" athletes who are "vegan" so short, while the list of
> >>>>>>>>> ****ing ****witted showbiz celebrity "vegans" so long?
>
> >>>>>>>>> Here's the basic truth - a truth with real meat in it: *"vegans" very
> >>>>>>>>> rarely are people of substance.
>
> >>>>>>>> You have no particular rational grounds for saying that.
>
> >>>>>>> I have every rational grounds for saying it. *It's a fact.
>
> >>>>>> What, precisely, would those rational grounds be?
>
> >>>>> My observation that publicly visible "vegans" usually are people who
> >>>>> have done nothing of substance. *Also, my observation that these lists
> >>>>> of "famous 'vegans'" *ALWAYS* are disproportionately populated by
> >>>>> obviously flaky people in show business and pop culture, while there is
> >>>>> a huge and glaring lack of engineers, scientists and, especially,
> >>>>> prominent medical doctors.
>
> >>>>> "veganism" simply is not a serious proposition. *It's style, not substance.- Hide quoted text -
>
> >>>>> - Show quoted text -
>
> >>>> yes, veganism is a style accesorry to most people, like a nose
> >>>> piercing or dying hair pink, or wearing a certain brand of clothing.
>
> >>> That's an absurd statement.
>
> >> It isn't. *It's exactly right.
>
> > It's an absurd statement grounded in ignorance.
>
> No, it isn't. *It's an insightful statement grounded in logic and
> observation.
That's very amusing.
|