Jo:
"That may be so (that Kirt insulted you) but let's
relax a bit, OK? There's no reason to add you to the
list of Rabid Raw Vegans."

In my opinion it makes more sense to say that to Kirt,
since he is the one who insulted me. Do you have a
list of Rabid RAF Eaters?

Secola/Nieft:
"Perhaps you should post a reference for such a
statement (as is found on beyondveg) and there will be
something to talk about. 2500 years is hardly
prehistoric."

I have that information from an article in a science
magazine. Since I am only reading to expand my
knowledge, I don't keep a list of all my references:
the information is mostly stored in my head and in a
notebook I use for that purpose. I could come up with
the exact reference, but that will take a substantial
amount of effort. However, I am sure that when you dig
into the literature you will find that prehistoric
humans did not have a very long lifespan.

Secola/Nieft:
"And of the hundreds of "lines of reasoning" on beyond
veg, how many have you dismissed because they don't
agree with what you believe beforehand?"

I have dismissed many, since they bring a lot of
slanted information. As I explained before, my biggest
problem with Beyond Veg is that they present
speculations and bring them as fact. When anyone comes
up with different references that proof the opposite
or with a different logical explanation, they ignore
you or insult you. I communicated with Beyond Veg
before and presented them with different information.
They first ignored me and then Tom came with the most
insulting language that has ever been expressed to me.
He didn't remark to any of my objections to Beyond Veg
and when I finally got him to respond to something, he
came with an argument that can easily be refuted (see
my original post). More basic errors in logic and
philosophy of Beyond Veg can be found on:
www.nildram.co.uk/veganmc/polemics.htm.
However, even though I don't like Beyond Veg, I still
think some of their information is valid. Here is a
quote from me to a reply to Anwar, referring to the
Pottenger's cats: "As much as I dislike Beyond Veg,
some of the information is pretty right on."

Secola/Nieft:
"I came up with a valid counter-argument and you cry
foul."

I have responded to that many times before. People can
judge for themselves how valid your counter argument
is. By the way, the only one who was crying foul was
you, by saying that my statement is "absurd" and
"illogical".

Secola/Nieft:
"I have no ideologies to shatter. You do."

Since when is being a raw food vegan more of an
ideology than being a RAF eater?

Secola/Nieft:
"So you see any counters as insults."

Like I said before, I love discussing evolution and
receiving valid counter arguments, but I don't buy
anything for insults and people putting words into my
mouth.

Secola/Nieft:
"You have yet to say, "hey, yeah, I was not thinking
clearly about that" to any of the counters provided by
several posters."

I have said a couple of times that people had a good
or interesting remark, but even in these cases I was
always able to come with reasonable arguments to
defend my point of view. People can judge for
themselves by reading all my posts. Really, I am
waiting for the time I can say "hey, yeah, I was not
thinking clearly about that", because I love to find
the weak spots in my theory. PLEASE point them out to
me!

Secola/Nieft:
"You just go on about how you are right and the other
fellow is immature or inadequate in some way."

Now tell me Kirt, how many times do you want me to
repeat myself?! Did you ever notice the title of my
post: "Evolution: THOUGHTS about Beyond Veg and raw
meat"? Did I say: "Evolution: THE TRUTH about Beyond
Veg and Raw meat"? I am always open to discussing my
philosophies when people come with reasonable
arguments.

Take care, Arjen



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.
http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1