"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>> > SN
>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>
> I see you're back to adding a third description
> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
> =======================
Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the '>'. it is
already there because you post extra lines in each of your replies.
Same goes for the extra '>' below. Try learning something once in awhile.
And thanks again for snipping without annotation, proves your dishonesty,
because you snipped out even more of your ignorance. Ignorance that you
even posted trying to show your weren't ignorant. Didn't work, did it?

>

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
> to keep trying to educate.
>
> --
> SN
> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.




Still being dishonest i see. You just channged a post and made the meaning
change. Just like you usually do.
>
>

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
> to keep trying to educate.
>
> --
> SN
> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.




Still being dishonest i see. You just channged a post and made the meaning
change. Just like you usually do.
>
>

> Well, there is one way you can get it from your own gut, and maybe
that is
> waht you do. Never wash your hands, and eat out of the toilet. Is
that
> your secret?

No moron, shiteating is not what I'm talking about.

> Too late. Anyone
> > can look up old posts and see what you did until today.
> ======================
> Look at the bottom of each post fool. there are extra ">" already
there.
> I do not need to add them. If you didn't post extra lines in your
replies,
> then they wouldn't be there.

Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
else wrote it. Nice try moron.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

> Well, there is one way you can get it from your own gut, and maybe
that is
> waht you do. Never wash your hands, and eat out of the toilet. Is
that
> your secret?

No moron, shiteating is not what I'm talking about.

> Too late. Anyone
> > can look up old posts and see what you did until today.
> ======================
> Look at the bottom of each post fool. there are extra ">" already
there.
> I do not need to add them. If you didn't post extra lines in your
replies,
> then they wouldn't be there.

Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
else wrote it. Nice try moron.


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>> Well, there is one way you can get it from your own gut, and maybe
> that is
>> waht you do. Never wash your hands, and eat out of the toilet. Is
> that
>> your secret?
>
> No moron, shiteating is not what I'm talking about.
======================
Then you cannot get it.


>
>> Too late. Anyone
>> > can look up old posts and see what you did until today.
>> ======================
>> Look at the bottom of each post fool. there are extra ">" already
> there.
>> I do not need to add them. If you didn't post extra lines in your
> replies,
>> then they wouldn't be there.
>
> Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
> you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
> else wrote it. Nice try moron.
=======================
It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally change
posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your posts.
Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet decorum
and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't do it
though, you're too stupid to understand...


>
>
> --
> SN
> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>Have a nice blood-drenched breakfast, hypocrites.

> > Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
> > you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
> > else wrote it. Nice try moron.
> =======================
> It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally
change
> posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your
posts.
> Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet
decorum
> and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't do
it
> though, you're too stupid to understand...


I'm glad to see you admit that it was intentional.
If you don't like my snipping, tough. Lying is
worse than snipping.

--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

> > Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
> > you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
> > else wrote it. Nice try moron.
> =======================
> It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally
change
> posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your
posts.
> Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet
decorum
> and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't do
it
> though, you're too stupid to understand...


I'm glad to see you admit that it was intentional.
If you don't like my snipping, tough. Lying is
worse than snipping.

--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> Herbicides would be lessened hugely if most of grains
> were not going to feed animals. Less land than we
> use now could feed more people.

That is a fallacy, a large proportion of livestock feed is comprised of
by-products from oils, liquors, low grade and spoiled grains, other wastes
and excess. You are also advocating finding other means of production of all
the other commodities that use animal by-products, and they are too numerous
to mention. You're presenting a common vegan simplistic notion that doesn't
hold up.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> Herbicides would be lessened hugely if most of grains
> were not going to feed animals. Less land than we
> use now could feed more people.

That is a fallacy, a large proportion of livestock feed is comprised of
by-products from oils, liquors, low grade and spoiled grains, other wastes
and excess. You are also advocating finding other means of production of all
the other commodities that use animal by-products, and they are too numerous
to mention. You're presenting a common vegan simplistic notion that doesn't
hold up.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> Herbicides would be lessened hugely if most of grains
> were not going to feed animals. Less land than we
> use now could feed more people.

That is a fallacy, a large proportion of livestock feed is comprised of
by-products from oils, liquors, low grade and spoiled grains, other wastes
and excess. You are also advocating finding other means of production of all
the other commodities that use animal by-products, and they are too numerous
to mention. You're presenting a common vegan simplistic notion that doesn't
hold up.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>> > Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
>> > you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
>> > else wrote it. Nice try moron.
>> =======================
>> It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally
> change
>> posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your
> posts.
>> Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet
> decorum
>> and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't do
> it
>> though, you're too stupid to understand...
>
>
> I'm glad to see you admit that it was intentional.
==================
Unlike you, I never said otherwise.



> If you don't like my snipping, tough. Lying is
> worse than snipping.
> ========================
I didn't ly. The fact that you are maintaining a website, even after
claiming that you are living a supposed life that reduces animal death and
suffering IS ironic, ignorant, and hypocritic. You, on the other hand, ARE
lying when you snip out parts of posts and then reply as if those parts
don't exist when making your so-called arguments.


> --
> SN
> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
> in the guts produce it.

You don't have the digestive system of a herbivore, you have the digestive
system of an opportunistic omnivore.

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> So wouldn't it be nice to at least lessen the crops needed by
> growing vegan foods? Way, way more land could be let go
> wild again, which as a hunter I think you would like (for the
> wrong reason).

http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nob...-LeastHarm.htm

"Scented Nectar" > wrote

> So wouldn't it be nice to at least lessen the crops needed by
> growing vegan foods? Way, way more land could be let go
> wild again, which as a hunter I think you would like (for the
> wrong reason).

http://courses.ats.rochester.edu/nob...-LeastHarm.htm

"Scented Nectar" > wrote
> "Dutch" > wrote
>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>>
>> >> > I'd rather they go make a pot of my tasty veg chili instead!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> How about a recipe?
>> >
>> > Okay, but I'm not sure that it's completely vegan.
>> > It has some Yves products in it that someone said
>> > contains eggs.
>>
>> Yves products do not contain eggs.
>
> That's good to know. I won't feel like I have
> to give their stuff up.

You're just on a headlong quest to attempt to live up to this nonsensical
vegan idea of abstinence from animal products and you aren't going to let
reason stand in your way.

[..]
>> I was a vegetarian for
>> 18 years, but I eat a more varied diet now,
>> and I feel stronger and have
>> better mental acuity.
>
> Different strokes for different folks I guess. I found
> the opposite. I do better on a veg diet.

So did I, at first. It all depends on your age, physical condition, and a
lot of other factors. Just don't let the dogma of veganism end up
controlling you, as it already seems to have begun doing.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>>> > SN
>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>
>> I see you're back to adding a third description
>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
>> =======================
>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the '>'.

You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
to this proves;

[start - Scented Nectar to you]
> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
==================
What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
[end]

You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
altered as well.

A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
blame you for his editing of your posts.

[start - Dutch to me]
> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> > > > > > > > list here.

I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);

> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> > > > > > > clue about.
> > > > > >
> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> > > >
> > > > You lied about what you eat.
> > > >
> > > You have no way of knowing that,
> >
> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> > and mustard cress.
>
> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
[end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3

You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
will be altered without you even knowing about it.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:21:11 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>>
>> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
>> to keep trying to educate.
>>
>> --
>> SN
>> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>
>Still being dishonest i see.

Rather, you are by altering her sig again to make it
read as if she wrote in that bottom line instead of
you.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:38 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Jay Santos" > wrote in message nk.net...
>> rick etter wrote:
>>> "John Coleman" > wrote in message ...
>>>>"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>>
>>>>>If? What a hoot!!! Try checking the total amounts of 'organic'
>>>>>pesticides alone that are applied to crops in the US. Organic farms
>>>>>account for 3% of the US production, but use about 25% of total
>>>>>pesticides.
>>>>
>>>>support this with evidence
>>>
>>> ===========================
>>> Sure, then it will be your turn, right killer? I've yet to see any
>>> claims from you supported with anything more than rant, diatribe,
>>> propaganda, and hate.
>>>
>>> http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pu...oxic_Tools.pdf
>>
>> That does NOT support your claim. Your claim was that organic farms
>> account for 25% of total pesticides. That document shows that organic
>> *pesticides*, which are used in both organic and conventional farming,
>> account for 25% of all pesticides. The document does NOT say that organic
>> *farms* account for 25% of all pesticide use.
>===============
>The contention still stands that organic can, and does use more pesticides.

That wasn't your original claim. You originally claimed
that, "Organic farms account for 3% of the US production,
but use about 25% of total pesticides." But the material you
provided clearly shows that the 25% figure concerns both
organic AND conventional farming. You were wrong, and
if you were to read the material you provided you would see
that for yourself, but I knew you'd be too dishonest to retract
your claim.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:38 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Jay Santos" > wrote in message nk.net...
>> rick etter wrote:
>>> "John Coleman" > wrote in message ...
>>>>"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>>
>>>>>If? What a hoot!!! Try checking the total amounts of 'organic'
>>>>>pesticides alone that are applied to crops in the US. Organic farms
>>>>>account for 3% of the US production, but use about 25% of total
>>>>>pesticides.
>>>>
>>>>support this with evidence
>>>
>>> ===========================
>>> Sure, then it will be your turn, right killer? I've yet to see any
>>> claims from you supported with anything more than rant, diatribe,
>>> propaganda, and hate.
>>>
>>> http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pu...oxic_Tools.pdf
>>
>> That does NOT support your claim. Your claim was that organic farms
>> account for 25% of total pesticides. That document shows that organic
>> *pesticides*, which are used in both organic and conventional farming,
>> account for 25% of all pesticides. The document does NOT say that organic
>> *farms* account for 25% of all pesticide use.
>===============
>The contention still stands that organic can, and does use more pesticides.

That wasn't your original claim. You originally claimed
that, "Organic farms account for 3% of the US production,
but use about 25% of total pesticides." But the material you
provided clearly shows that the 25% figure concerns both
organic AND conventional farming. You were wrong, and
if you were to read the material you provided you would see
that for yourself, but I knew you'd be too dishonest to retract
your claim.

On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:57:35 -0500, "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
>"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net...
>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>> >> >
>> >> > If you put one group of people on a meat only diet,
>> >> > and another on a plant only diet (=vegan), guess
>> >> > who would get very sick very soon.
>> >> =====================
>> >> The vegan, fool. You cannot live on plants alone. try again,
>> > stinky...
>> >
>> > Most readers here would strongly disagree. On a meat
>> > only diet your only food is body parts and if you're lucky,
>> > stomach contents. On a vegan diet you can eat fruits,
>> > vegetables, grains, legumes, seeds, and nuts.
>> ======================
>> And you won't get the b12 you need to live. Has a nice
>> dementia, fool.
>
>Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
>in the guts produce it.

B12 is easily obtainable and produced in vats of bacteria.
Solgar B-12 is a good vegan example if you're not already
obtaining it in fortified foods.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:38 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Jay Santos" > wrote in message
link.net...
>>> rick etter wrote:
>>>> "John Coleman" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>"rick etter" > wrote in message
arthlink.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>>If? What a hoot!!! Try checking the total amounts of 'organic'
>>>>>>pesticides alone that are applied to crops in the US. Organic farms
>>>>>>account for 3% of the US production, but use about 25% of total
>>>>>>pesticides.
>>>>>
>>>>>support this with evidence
>>>>
>>>> ===========================
>>>> Sure, then it will be your turn, right killer? I've yet to see any
>>>> claims from you supported with anything more than rant, diatribe,
>>>> propaganda, and hate.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pu...oxic_Tools.pdf
>>>
>>> That does NOT support your claim. Your claim was that organic farms
>>> account for 25% of total pesticides. That document shows that organic
>>> *pesticides*, which are used in both organic and conventional farming,
>>> account for 25% of all pesticides. The document does NOT say that
>>> organic
>>> *farms* account for 25% of all pesticide use.
>>===============
>>The contention still stands that organic can, and does use more
>>pesticides.
>
> That wasn't your original claim. You originally claimed
> that, "Organic farms account for 3% of the US production,
> but use about 25% of total pesticides." But the material you
> provided clearly shows that the 25% figure concerns both
> organic AND conventional farming.
==============
\No, it clearly doesn't say that. Besides, the gist of the article is just
what I said. Organic farming uses more pesticides per acre, more often.
Too bad *you* can't read. But that's not new, retard...


You were wrong, and
> if you were to read the material you provided you would see
> that for yourself, but I knew you'd be too dishonest to retract
> your claim.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>>>> > SN
>>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>>
>>> I see you're back to adding a third description
>>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
>>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
>>> =======================
>>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the '>'.
>
> You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
> to this proves;
====================
Nope. Unlike you,, the biggest usenet liar here...


>
> [start - Scented Nectar to you]
>> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
>> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
> ==================
> What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
> [end]
>
> You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
> it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
> you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
> done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
> altered as well.
>
> A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
> here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
> from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
> a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
> directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
> He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
> reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
> then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
> blame you for his editing of your posts.
>
> [start - Dutch to me]
>> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
>> > > > > > > > list here.
>
> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
> Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);
>
>> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
>> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
>> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
>> > > > > > > clue about.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>> > > >
>> > > > You lied about what you eat.
>> > > >
>> > > You have no way of knowing that,
>> >
>> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
>> > and mustard cress.
>>
>> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
>> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3
>
> You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
> suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
> will be altered without you even knowing about it.
>

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>>>> > SN
>>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>>
>>> I see you're back to adding a third description
>>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
>>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
>>> =======================
>>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the '>'.
>
> You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
> to this proves;
====================
Nope. Unlike you,, the biggest usenet liar here...


>
> [start - Scented Nectar to you]
>> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
>> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
> ==================
> What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
> [end]
>
> You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
> it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
> you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
> done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
> altered as well.
>
> A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
> here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
> from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
> a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
> directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
> He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
> reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
> then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
> blame you for his editing of your posts.
>
> [start - Dutch to me]
>> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
>> > > > > > > > list here.
>
> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
> Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);
>
>> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
>> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
>> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
>> > > > > > > clue about.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>> > > >
>> > > > You lied about what you eat.
>> > > >
>> > > You have no way of knowing that,
>> >
>> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
>> > and mustard cress.
>>
>> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
>> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3
>
> You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
> suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
> will be altered without you even knowing about it.
>

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:21:11 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
>>> to keep trying to educate.
>>>
>>> --
>>> SN
>>> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>
>>Still being dishonest i see.
>
> Rather, you are by altering her sig again to make it
> read as if she wrote in that bottom line instead of
> you.
=====================
This from the greatest snipper of post for dishonesty on the net!!! What a
hoot! Way to go retard. thatnks for admitting that what you do is
wrong!!!

"Reynard" > wrote in message
news
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:21:11 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
>>> to keep trying to educate.
>>>
>>> --
>>> SN
>>> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>
>>Still being dishonest i see.
>
> Rather, you are by altering her sig again to make it
> read as if she wrote in that bottom line instead of
> you.
=====================
This from the greatest snipper of post for dishonesty on the net!!! What a
hoot! Way to go retard. thatnks for admitting that what you do is
wrong!!!

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:57:35 -0500, "Scented Nectar"
> > wrote:
>>"rick etter" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >> >
>>> >> > If you put one group of people on a meat only diet,
>>> >> > and another on a plant only diet (=vegan), guess
>>> >> > who would get very sick very soon.
>>> >> =====================
>>> >> The vegan, fool. You cannot live on plants alone. try again,
>>> > stinky...
>>> >
>>> > Most readers here would strongly disagree. On a meat
>>> > only diet your only food is body parts and if you're lucky,
>>> > stomach contents. On a vegan diet you can eat fruits,
>>> > vegetables, grains, legumes, seeds, and nuts.
>>> ======================
>>> And you won't get the b12 you need to live. Has a nice
>>> dementia, fool.
>>
>>Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
>>in the guts produce it.
>
> B12 is easily obtainable and produced in vats of bacteria.
> Solgar B-12 is a good vegan example if you're not already
> obtaining it in fortified foods.
==================
LOL Thanks for proving my point, retard. You can't get all the nutrients
you need to live from plants alone. Way to go, killer!

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:57:35 -0500, "Scented Nectar"
> > wrote:
>>"rick etter" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>> >> >
>>> >> > If you put one group of people on a meat only diet,
>>> >> > and another on a plant only diet (=vegan), guess
>>> >> > who would get very sick very soon.
>>> >> =====================
>>> >> The vegan, fool. You cannot live on plants alone. try again,
>>> > stinky...
>>> >
>>> > Most readers here would strongly disagree. On a meat
>>> > only diet your only food is body parts and if you're lucky,
>>> > stomach contents. On a vegan diet you can eat fruits,
>>> > vegetables, grains, legumes, seeds, and nuts.
>>> ======================
>>> And you won't get the b12 you need to live. Has a nice
>>> dementia, fool.
>>
>>Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
>>in the guts produce it.
>
> B12 is easily obtainable and produced in vats of bacteria.
> Solgar B-12 is a good vegan example if you're not already
> obtaining it in fortified foods.
==================
LOL Thanks for proving my point, retard. You can't get all the nutrients
you need to live from plants alone. Way to go, killer!

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:25:50 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:17:38 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Jay Santos" > wrote in message nk.net...
>>>> rick etter wrote:
>>>>> "John Coleman" > wrote in message ...
>>>>>>"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If? What a hoot!!! Try checking the total amounts of 'organic'
>>>>>>>pesticides alone that are applied to crops in the US. Organic farms
>>>>>>>account for 3% of the US production, but use about 25% of total
>>>>>>>pesticides.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>support this with evidence
>>>>>
>>>>> ===========================
>>>>> Sure, then it will be your turn, right killer? I've yet to see any
>>>>> claims from you supported with anything more than rant, diatribe,
>>>>> propaganda, and hate.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pu...oxic_Tools.pdf
>>>>
>>>> That does NOT support your claim. Your claim was that organic farms
>>>> account for 25% of total pesticides. That document shows that organic
>>>> *pesticides*, which are used in both organic and conventional farming,
>>>> account for 25% of all pesticides. The document does NOT say that
>>>> organic *farms* account for 25% of all pesticide use.
>>>===============
>>>The contention still stands that organic can, and does use more
>>>pesticides.
>>
>> That wasn't your original claim. You originally claimed
>> that, "Organic farms account for 3% of the US production,
>> but use about 25% of total pesticides." But the material you
>> provided clearly shows that the 25% figure concerns both
>> organic AND conventional farming.
>==============
>\No, it clearly doesn't say that.

Then, are you calling Jonathan a liar? He clearly pointed out
to you that, contrary to your claim, the "document shows that
organic *pesticides*, which are used in both organic and
conventional farming, account for 25% of all pesticides. The
document does NOT say that organic *farms* account for
25% of all pesticide use." If you're now claiming that the
document you supplied, "clearly doesn't say that", why didn't
you tell Jon the same when he showed you your error, Etter?

>> You were wrong, and
>> if you were to read the material you provided you would see
>> that for yourself, but I knew you'd be too dishonest to retract
>> your claim.

Yep, I knew it.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:32:14 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:57:35 -0500, "Scented Nectar" > wrote:
>>>"rick etter" > wrote in message ink.net...
>>>> "Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > If you put one group of people on a meat only diet,
>>>> >> > and another on a plant only diet (=vegan), guess
>>>> >> > who would get very sick very soon.
>>>> >> =====================
>>>> >> The vegan, fool. You cannot live on plants alone. try again,
>>>> > stinky...
>>>> >
>>>> > Most readers here would strongly disagree. On a meat
>>>> > only diet your only food is body parts and if you're lucky,
>>>> > stomach contents. On a vegan diet you can eat fruits,
>>>> > vegetables, grains, legumes, seeds, and nuts.
>>>> ======================
>>>> And you won't get the b12 you need to live. Has a nice
>>>> dementia, fool.
>>>
>>>Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
>>>in the guts produce it.
>>
>> B12 is easily obtainable and produced in vats of bacteria.
>> Solgar B-12 is a good vegan example if you're not already
>> obtaining it in fortified foods.
>==================
>LOL Thanks for proving my point

The point being raised is that B12 can be sourced without
eating a rotting corpse. It's commercially produced in vats
of bacteria and perfectly suitable for vegans.

>You can't get all the nutrients you need to live from plants alone.

You certainly can if you eat them without first washing them.
Unlike meat, a person can get all the vitamins and nutrients he
needs from plant material alone.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:28:12 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message news
>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:21:11 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>>>>
>>>> You know, you are just too screwed up for me
>>>> to keep trying to educate.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> SN
>>>> http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>>> A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>>> Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>>> Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>>
>>>Still being dishonest i see.
>>
>> Rather, you are by altering her sig again to make it
>> read as if she wrote in that bottom line instead of
>> you.
>=====================
>This from the greatest snipper of post

Snipping parts of a post which don't merit a response
is perfectly reasonable and ethical. Editing whole
sentences into your opponent's sig, as you do, is not.
You owe Scented Nectar an apology.

On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:27:04 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>"Reynard" > wrote in message ...
>> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
>>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message ...
>>>>> > SN
>>>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
>>>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
>>>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
>>>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
>>>>
>>>> I see you're back to adding a third description
>>>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
>>>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
>>>> =======================
>>>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the '>'.
>>
>> You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
>> to this proves;
>====================
>Nope.

Yep. Read on. You admitted to the fact that you added a
third line to her sig, and then went on to blame her for it
by writing, "What's the matter fool? Don't like the same
as you give?"

>>>[start - Scented Nectar to you]
>>> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
>>> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
>> ==================
>> What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
>> [end]
>>
>> You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
>> it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
>> you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
>> done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
>> altered as well.
>>
>> A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
>> here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
>> from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
>> a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
>> directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
>> He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
>> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
>> reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
>> then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
>> blame you for his editing of your posts.
>>
>> [start - Dutch to me]
>>> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
>>> > > > > > > > list here.
>>
>> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
>> Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);
>>
>>> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
>>> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
>>> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
>>> > > > > > > clue about.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
>>> > > >
>>> > > > You lied about what you eat.
>>> > > >
>>> > > You have no way of knowing that,
>>> >
>>> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
>>> > and mustard cress.
>>>
>>> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
>>> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
>> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3
>>
>> You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
>> suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
>> will be altered without you even knowing about it.
>>
>

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:27:04 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
> >"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> >> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" >
wrote:
> >>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> >>>>> > SN
> >>>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> >>>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> >>>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> >>>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
> >>>>
> >>>> I see you're back to adding a third description
> >>>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
> >>>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
> >>>> =======================
> >>>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the
'>'.
> >>
> >> You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
> >> to this proves;
> >====================
> >Nope.

He's trying to get away with it based on the fact that a
' >' was already there. What he's hoping to avoid saying
is that he placed the 3rd line beside it on purpose to
make it look like I wrote it.

> Yep. Read on. You admitted to the fact that you added a
> third line to her sig, and then went on to blame her for it
> by writing, "What's the matter fool? Don't like the same
> as you give?"

I've never falsified his posts, so he lies again. He tries
to justify it by saying it was because I snipped stuff of
his in posts. Not the same thing at all.

> >>>[start - Scented Nectar to you]
> >>> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
> >>> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
> >> ==================
> >> What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
> >> [end]
> >>
> >> You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
> >> it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
> >> you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
> >> done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
> >> altered as well.
> >>
> >> A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
> >> here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
> >> from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
> >> a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
> >> directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
> >> He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
> >> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
> >> reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
> >> then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
> >> blame you for his editing of your posts.

Yep. It makes their 'side' of the debates look dishonest and
discredits any other points they try to make. Same with the
constant insults.

> >>
> >> [start - Dutch to me]
> >>> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> >>> > > > > > > > list here.
> >>
> >> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
> >> Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);
> >>
> >>> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> >>> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> >>> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> >>> > > > > > > clue about.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > You lied about what you eat.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > You have no way of knowing that,
> >>> >
> >>> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> >>> > and mustard cress.
> >>>
> >>> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> >>> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> >> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3
> >>
> >> You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
> >> suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
> >> will be altered without you even knowing about it.

I saw him doing it right from the start but just rolled my eyes.
Then it sunk in more that he was trying to make it look like
I wrote it, so it was time to make him fess up. He's
avoiding it (not well).


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:27:04 GMT, "rick etter" > wrote:
> >"Reynard" > wrote in message
...
> >> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 00:18:44 GMT, "rick etter" >
wrote:
> >>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote in message
...
> >>>>> > SN
> >>>>> > http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
> >>>>> > A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
> >>>>> > Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.
> >>>>> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.
> >>>>
> >>>> I see you're back to adding a third description
> >>>> line to my sig. Complete with the extra ' >' to
> >>>> make it look like I wrote it. What a liar.
> >>>> =======================
> >>>Look at the beginning of the line above fool. I did NOT add the
'>'.
> >>
> >> You're lying, Rick, as your comment in another thread
> >> to this proves;
> >====================
> >Nope.

He's trying to get away with it based on the fact that a
' >' was already there. What he's hoping to avoid saying
is that he placed the 3rd line beside it on purpose to
make it look like I wrote it.

> Yep. Read on. You admitted to the fact that you added a
> third line to her sig, and then went on to blame her for it
> by writing, "What's the matter fool? Don't like the same
> as you give?"

I've never falsified his posts, so he lies again. He tries
to justify it by saying it was because I snipped stuff of
his in posts. Not the same thing at all.

> >>>[start - Scented Nectar to you]
> >>> Note below the extra '>' you always put in to make it look
> >>> like I wrote it. What's that about, liar?
> >> ==================
> >> What's the matter fool? Don't like the same as you give?
> >> [end]
> >>
> >> You've admitted you added a third line to her sig, and now
> >> it seems you're trying to blame Scented Nectar for what
> >> you did. Not only is it wrong to edit people's sigs, as you've
> >> done, it's also wrong to blame the person whose lines you've
> >> altered as well.
> >>
> >> A note to Scented Nectar; You'll find most if not all the trolls
> >> here will alter your posts in some way after a while. Apart
> >> from the earlier example I gave you from 'usual suspect', take
> >> a look at how Dutch changed my reply to a challenge he made
> >> directly to me while I was posting under the name 'ipse dixit'.
> >> He challenged me to post a typical weekly grocery list to which
> >> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress." He removed my
> >> reply and wrote a number of non-vegan foods in its stead, and
> >> then went on to blame me for editing it, just as Rick is trying to
> >> blame you for his editing of your posts.

Yep. It makes their 'side' of the debates look dishonest and
discredits any other points they try to make. Same with the
constant insults.

> >>
> >> [start - Dutch to me]
> >>> > > > > > > > I challenge you to post your typical weekly grocery
> >>> > > > > > > > list here.
> >>
> >> I replied, "Fallen apples and mustard cress" at this point, but
> >> Dutch snipped that away and wrote (below);
> >>
> >>> > > > > > > Factory farmed rice, grains, fruits and vegetables
> >>> > > > > > > purchased indiscriminately, coffee, tea, cheese,
> >>> > > > > > > milk and eggs, along with some shit that I have no
> >>> > > > > > > clue about.
> >>> > > > > >
> >>> > > > > You have dishonestly included a list of items I don't eat
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > > You lied about what you eat.
> >>> > > >
> >>> > > You have no way of knowing that,
> >>> >
> >>> > I know your grocery list is not comprised of fallen apples
> >>> > and mustard cress.
> >>>
> >>> Whether you believe my answer or not is no excuse for
> >>> dishonestly editing it to include a of list non-vegan food.
> >> [end] http://tinyurl.com/3tde3
> >>
> >> You have to be extra vigilant here where Rick, Dutch, usual
> >> suspect and Jonathan Ball are concerned, else your sentences
> >> will be altered without you even knowing about it.

I saw him doing it right from the start but just rolled my eyes.
Then it sunk in more that he was trying to make it look like
I wrote it, so it was time to make him fess up. He's
avoiding it (not well).


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

> >> > Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
> >> > you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
> >> > else wrote it. Nice try moron.
> >> =======================
> >> It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally
> > change
> >> posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your
> > posts.
> >> Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet
> > decorum
> >> and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't
do
> > it
> >> though, you're too stupid to understand...
> >
> >
> > I'm glad to see you admit that it was intentional.
> ==================
> Unlike you, I never said otherwise.

I never said my snipping was nonintentional. What the
f are you talking about?


> > If you don't like my snipping, tough. Lying is
> > worse than snipping.
> > ========================
> I didn't ly. The fact that you are maintaining a website, even after
> claiming that you are living a supposed life that reduces animal death
and
> suffering IS ironic, ignorant, and hypocritic. You, on the other
hand, ARE
> lying when you snip out parts of posts and then reply as if those
parts
> don't exist when making your so-called arguments.

First of all, snipping is not lying. The worst you can
accuse me of doing is ignoring some of your ranting.
At best snipping is efficient, more to the point, and
saves a lot of page-downing and searching for the
new response. I snip (sometimes, not all) people
I don't like and people I do like. It's not a form of
lying.

My website is not any of your insults. I'm very proud
to provide a free resource useful to vegetarians of
all types, from the strictest vegan to a lacto-ovo,
wherever people are on the scale of vegetarianism
I want to provide this resource. Nothing wrong
with that. And it doesn't matter where I personally
am on that scale of vegetarianism, either. I'll
continue to provide this for ALL vegetarians.

> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.

Can you be more specific?


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

> >> > Even if some extra ' >'s were there, everyone knows
> >> > you don't reply beside those or it looks like someone
> >> > else wrote it. Nice try moron.
> >> =======================
> >> It was the intention, you ignorant dolt! Since you intentionally
> > change
> >> posts with your snipping, I was showing you the ignorance of your
> > posts.
> >> Glad to see you don't like it. Now, try to post with some usenet
> > decorum
> >> and you'll get replies correctly from me too. I predict you can't
do
> > it
> >> though, you're too stupid to understand...
> >
> >
> > I'm glad to see you admit that it was intentional.
> ==================
> Unlike you, I never said otherwise.

I never said my snipping was nonintentional. What the
f are you talking about?


> > If you don't like my snipping, tough. Lying is
> > worse than snipping.
> > ========================
> I didn't ly. The fact that you are maintaining a website, even after
> claiming that you are living a supposed life that reduces animal death
and
> suffering IS ironic, ignorant, and hypocritic. You, on the other
hand, ARE
> lying when you snip out parts of posts and then reply as if those
parts
> don't exist when making your so-called arguments.

First of all, snipping is not lying. The worst you can
accuse me of doing is ignoring some of your ranting.
At best snipping is efficient, more to the point, and
saves a lot of page-downing and searching for the
new response. I snip (sometimes, not all) people
I don't like and people I do like. It's not a form of
lying.

My website is not any of your insults. I'm very proud
to provide a free resource useful to vegetarians of
all types, from the strictest vegan to a lacto-ovo,
wherever people are on the scale of vegetarianism
I want to provide this resource. Nothing wrong
with that. And it doesn't matter where I personally
am on that scale of vegetarianism, either. I'll
continue to provide this for ALL vegetarians.

> > Irony, ignorance and hypocrisy on display.

Can you be more specific?


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

"Dutch" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>
> > Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
> > in the guts produce it.
>
> You don't have the digestive system of a herbivore, you have the
digestive
> system of an opportunistic omnivore.

I disagree. There's two common gut bacteria
that someone here mentioned that produce it
in a manner that the body can absorb it.

Also, I've heard claims that I can't verify however,
that sprouts, seaweeds, and yeast can provide
b12. Maybe if someone knows more about
this they could post please?


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

"Dutch" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Scented Nectar" > wrote
>
> > Just like the way cows get their b12, good flora
> > in the guts produce it.
>
> You don't have the digestive system of a herbivore, you have the
digestive
> system of an opportunistic omnivore.

I disagree. There's two common gut bacteria
that someone here mentioned that produce it
in a manner that the body can absorb it.

Also, I've heard claims that I can't verify however,
that sprouts, seaweeds, and yeast can provide
b12. Maybe if someone knows more about
this they could post please?


--
SN
http://www.scentednectar.com/veg/
A huge directory listing over 700 veg recipe sites.
Has a fun 'Jump to a Randon Link' button.

Scented Nectar wrote:

> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote
>>
>>>>>>>There is no such word as "veganic".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There should be. It's a great word. Someone here used
>>>>>>it a few days ago.
>>>>>
>>>>>There is such a word
>>>
>>>http://www.free-definition.com/Veganic-gardening.html
>>>
>>>>If people use words they eventually become recognized, that doesn't
>>>
>>>mean
>>>
>>>>they have any real significance.
>>>
>>>Too late. It's now a real word with real significance.
>>>It's the perfect word for what used to take me a
>>>whole sentence to write. Language constantly
>>>evolves. New words come into being, and some
>>>of the other words become obsolete.
>>
>>"Veganic farming" only extends the fallacy of "veganism" a step
>
> further.
>
>>Just because a farmer does not use manure on his fields does not mean
>
> that
>
>>animals are not harmed.
>
>
> I think that veganic farming includes no-kill harvests.

First, there is no such thing as "veganic farming".
Second, there is no form of commercial agriculture in
which farmers make consistent and effective efforts to
avoid killing animals.

Scented Nectar wrote:

> "Dutch" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>"Scented Nectar" > wrote
>>
>>>>>>>There is no such word as "veganic".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There should be. It's a great word. Someone here used
>>>>>>it a few days ago.
>>>>>
>>>>>There is such a word
>>>
>>>http://www.free-definition.com/Veganic-gardening.html
>>>
>>>>If people use words they eventually become recognized, that doesn't
>>>
>>>mean
>>>
>>>>they have any real significance.
>>>
>>>Too late. It's now a real word with real significance.
>>>It's the perfect word for what used to take me a
>>>whole sentence to write. Language constantly
>>>evolves. New words come into being, and some
>>>of the other words become obsolete.
>>
>>"Veganic farming" only extends the fallacy of "veganism" a step
>
> further.
>
>>Just because a farmer does not use manure on his fields does not mean
>
> that
>
>>animals are not harmed.
>
>
> I think that veganic farming includes no-kill harvests.

First, there is no such thing as "veganic farming".
Second, there is no form of commercial agriculture in
which farmers make consistent and effective efforts to
avoid killing animals.